One of the more curious aspects of dividend investing is that some investors slavishly focus on dividend yield above other indicators of a healthy dividend yielding stock. For definitional purposes, dividend yield is ratio derived from: (amount of dividend paid annually/price per share). The higher the dividend yield, the higher the dividend paid relative to its stock price. Thus, a stock paying $1 in dividends and trading at $20/share has a yield of 5% whereas a stock paying $1 and trading at $50/share has a 2% yield. In the abstract, and if you assumed the stock price never goes up, the 5% yield stock is “safer” in the sense you know you are getting a 5% return a year. So, do we always look at dividend yield first when assessing a good dividend paying stock?
I would argue no. The Globe and Mail has been running a series on the best dividend stocks to invest in during 2008. Last week, they listed some of the following as U.S. Dividend Winners: Allstate, Bank of America, Anheuser-Busch, Home-Depot and JnJ. Home Depot was the only stock on this list which is also made the list of this year’s Dogs of the Dow (the Dogs of the Dow is an annual list of stocks who are members of the Dow Jones Industrial Average which has the highest dividend yield as of December 31 of each year).
Why was Home Depot the only stock to make both the analyst list and the Dogs of the Dow? This requires a look at context. If you are like me, and you have a 20-30 year window for investing, chasing the highest dividend yield is not necessarily the best strategy. Remember that dividend yield is a function of both dividend paid and stock price. The issue is that high dividend yield stocks occur in the following situations:
- The dividend paid is extremely high BUT that means, in most cases, there isn’t much room for dividend increases. If you have a long investment window, you want steady dividend increases since it generally indicates that the business is healthy enough over long period of time to return cash to shareholders.
- The stock price is, relatively speaking, low which means either the market believes the business is not going to grow that rapidly (remember that a stock price is really a predication of future performance) or the business has suffered a set-back and you may better off investing in a healthier competitor (Citigroup is a good example of this phenomenon; it had a dividend yield of over 7% entering into 2008 based on rapidly declining stock prices; its smaller rival, Wells Fargo (Buffet’s favorite bank) had a lower yield and, arguably, better prospects going forward).
There’s also a larger contextual issue with chasing the highest dividend yield if you have a long investing window. High dividend yield stocks traditionally consist of leaders in mature industries. This year’s Dogs of the Dow consists of members in stodgy and mature businesses like: General Motors, DuPont, AT & T and Altira (a tobacco company). They are under competitive pressures which they have not faced before. I am not sure if the highest dividend yield stocks today will be leaders 10-20 years from now. We are living in an age where massive political and economic change is occurring and we can’t rely upon the industrial leaders from by-gone eras to boast our portfolio.
In a perfect world, my analysis is not to chase dividend yield but to find dividends yielding between 2% -4% in a normal market (I would not rely on dividend yields for financial stocks in this market), with a 5 year annualized dividend growth of 15% and a conservative dividend payout ratio (the % of profits paid out as dividend and written about in my post is my dividend payment safe?). If I had to prioritize these three factors, I would pick the following:
- 5 year dividend growth: This shows the business is healthy from a cash flow perspective, committed to raising dividends over time and, statistically speaking, the best stocks to invest in relative to their steadier dividend paying peers and non dividend paying stock.
- Dividend payout ratio: This shows whether the business has room to grow its dividend. Once you have a dividend payout ratio over 50%, there isn’t too much room to grow the dividend payments. This is not desirable if you have a long investment window and are looking for a “raise” every year.
- Dividend yield: If a dividend yield is high, the stock price is relatively low (which, I readily admit, may present opportunities to engage in value investing) or the dividend payment does not have too much room to increase. I want the happy medium- a growing dividend which can grow year over year and an appreciating stock price.
I wanted to make one final point. Chasing the highest dividend yield is tantamount to investing in bonds on steroids. No one would argue that dividend payments are desirable but extremely high dividend yield stocks (5% plus)Â do not appreciate that much relative to its lowest yield counterparts. You create an appreciation ceiling in many respects by investing in too many high dividend yield stocks (having said that, if you can find a stock that has a high yield because the price has been affected negatively in a one-time event, then it may be worth investigating). The point of good dividend stock investing is to benefit from the best of both worlds- cash flow and appreciation. If you chase yield at the expense of increasing dividend payments, you are forgoing appreciation potential.
Do I avoid high dividend yield stock altogether? No. One suggestion I have heard is to anchor your dividend stock portfolio with a high dividend yield stock where the stock appreciation is limited but the dividend is quite secure (typically in a sin industry or utility where profit does not need to be reinvested into the business). Then, invest in several high-fliers- stocks that have increased dividends rapidly over time. The anchor stock mitigates any issues that may result from the high-fliers. I am looking for an anchor now.
As I mentioned, my analysis is contextual to my own situation. For some people with varying risk tolerance, different life circumstances etc., investing in the highest dividend yield stocks may be right for them. As usual do your own due diligence before investing.
Finally, if you want to know more about dividend investing, I would start with the Dividend Guy Blog and Dividend4Life as good resources. Financial Jungle has also constructed a 4.69% dividend yield portfolio for informational purposes.




January 29th, 2008 at 5:30 am
Good post.
I do feel though, that you are making too simple and close a connection between a high pay out ratio and a low potential to raise dividends going forward. The reason a high yield might be attractive for value or dividend growth investors is because the company has raised dividends at swift rates in the past. Just because the company is having temporarly problems does not mean that this will not continue going forward, after the storm has passed. Home Depot is actually a pretty good example. Let’s say HD’s pay out ratio crept up to 50% due to the housing mess. This does not necessarily mean that they will not have the room to raise the dividend going forward. It just means that due to earnings power and/or market conditions investors have bid the shares down while the dividend continued to rise. HD could languish for 2008 and 2009 and then rocket back up in 2010 and beyond when Americans realize that real estate is cheap again. HD’s dividend growth could continued to rise. If something like this occured you would be glad you bought HD yielding say 4.5% with a pay out ratio of 50%, because by that time the pay out ratio might shrink to 35% and the share price double.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:36 am
MoneyGardener read my mind. Most companies are cyclical to a degree, and often the best time to buy them is when they’re in a drought, a time when payout ratios are under pressure.
Another point is high yield does provide a stable base for future growth. Sure, Rothmans may not raise their dividends in any particular year, but they do it over the long haul and sometimes they issue special dividends. The regular and special dividends can be reinvested to buy more shares and more dividends. With the 6% yield (possibly higher after-tax depending on dividend tax credits), all ROC has to do is to raise distribution by a mere 4% to reach double digits return.
A 2% yielder growing at 8% is the same as a 6% yielder growing at 4%. But, in tough time, growth is harder to materialize than dividends. People often pull up stock charts and forget about dividend reinvestment. Many studies have shown that dividends represent over half the total long-term return, so if dividends are ignored, of course low yielders will have an advantage on stock charts.
I’m not preaching 100% high-yield high payout portfolios. Sure, no one should be investing based on yield alone, but neither should they invest based on payout ratio and 5-year dividend growth alone.
Don’t forget, earnings and cashflow aren’t the same thing. A cash poor company can still look profitable on paper. Just because a company has a low payout ratio doesn’t mean the dividend is safe. Not to mention companies fudge their earnings all the time.
The credit crunch may put pressure on the banks’ stellar 5-year div growth. And you look at integrater Husky Energy, the best time to invest was 5-years ago - before the energy boom and before they started hiking dividends aggressive.
For me, is so hard to rank the importance of 5-yr dividend growth, payout ratio and yield.
My own formula is maximize
(Dividend Yield + Projected Dividend Growth)/Risk
Yes, it’s a little subjective, but each of these parameters are no more or less important than the others.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Both of you make excellent points.
The statistics do show over a 20 year the stock price of a dividend growing stock is higher than dividend stocks which do not grow or non-dividend paying stocks. Dividend growth stocks are increasing their dividends over time because their profits are growing. Profits tend to grow because businesses tend to put back a lot of money into expansion. The use of funds for expansion rather than paying higher dividend does tend to keep the payout ratio lower.
I would also differentiate between growing and mature businesses. I want a mature business to have a high yield; these tend to be clustered in industries where the technological ceiling has been hit (i.e. tobacco). If they aren’t returning money to me, where is it going? Probably into the CEO’s inflated salary. Thus, I do agree with Financial Jungle about a stable base of growth and using mature businesses (and Rothman’s was the perfect example) as anchors in a dividend field portfolio- you know that the chances of that dividend declining are small.
But, for growing businesses, I shun looking at yield. You want a growing business to put back profits into expansion- that is how they will continue to be profitable which means the opportunity to raise dividends increases (this is also the reason I avoid dividend paying tech stocks- they sit on the other end of the scale- they require most of their profits to be put back into R & D to stay one step ahead of the technological curve). Thus, I tend to look at payout ratios in priority to other numbers- if the ratio is getting too high, it may indicate the business has stopped put profits into expansion and the rate of dividend increases potentially slowing.
I have a long investing window- I want to see my dividend payers expanding to give me raises annually.
Money Gardener does raise a good point. Where the market hits a crisis, yields get artificially pushed up and they may become good buying opportunities (as I stated in my post).
I also think Financial Jungle hit the nail on the head- earnings and cash flow are different concepts. Regardless of the stock I look at, I always look at cash flow from operating activities first.
January 30th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Interesting read, including the comments. Thanks for the mention.
Best Wishes,
D4L
February 5th, 2008 at 5:01 am
[...] Is Dividend Yield Over-rated? [...]
May 28th, 2008 at 12:16 am
Nice discussion. Very interesting approach on anchoring the portfolio.
November 24th, 2008 at 5:02 am
[...] if you are wondering about dividend yields, here is an older musing about whether dividend yields are ove-rated (as usual, the comments from my readers are more interesting than my [...]