Aviva Half Yearly.

[Dod101]

Ian

I am not sure where you get your ten year record of 2.34% for dividend increases. I am not even sure what you mean by that. If you look at the dividend table earlier in this thread you will see that ten years ago the dividend was 33p, today it is apparently 30.0p, assuming that it has been adjusted for any share splits, rights issues and so on. I do not follow the share so I do not know how accurate the table is but on the face of it, that is not much of a record.

But my judgement is much more based on my experience of looking at the performance of Aviva and for that matter RSA, and my judgement of the culture and so on. I have explained where I prefer my invested funds to be and I do not think many would argue too much about the performance of those I have mentioned. The companies I mentioned have I think all had steady increases in their dividends over the last ten years (I am not totally certain about Chesnara and Phoenix as I do not think I have held either for ten years, but I have held L & G for more than 10 years and they cut their dividend briefly during the financial crisis since when the dividend has increased annually)

Dod

[IanTHughes]

From their record (I do not hold) it must be getting near to the time of another rebasing of their dividend. This is simply a hopeless share.

I disagree, I think it has been an HYP stalwart. Based on my records:

Aviva PLC (AV) Annual Dividend Increases

3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years
  9.09% |  10.82% |    2.34%

On what do you base your analysis of “hopeless”?

Ian
Holder since Feb 2012 - Annual Return: 6.89%

I think it shows that "time in the market" isn't everything, and that "timing the market" can be more important then HYPers think.

Only in the sense that shares should be bought when High Yield. In the end, Time In The Market will most likely win out, except of course against those very few who are able to consistently beat the market. I know I cannot, can you?

The main different between your experience and mine is just the holding period. From my perspective of buying in 2006-7, I would struggle to use the word "stalwart" as my dividends have reduced (though increasing lately, of course) and my payouts have effectively been made by the capital I've seen shrink, by about 23%.

Well of course I realise that and I do sympathise. But then HYP is a Portfolio Strategy and like any HYPer I have some bad performers in my portfolio. Who knows, maybe some that you would class as "Stalwart"!

What we can say is that here's a company which weathered the worst financial crisis in our generation when other big financials were going bust and since then has show an excellent enthusiasm to re-established its dividend value.
It isn't all "hopeless" but it isn't great either!

Well I was merely pointing out that the analysis of "Hopeless" for an HYP candidate with such a good dividend record, was rather missing the point of HYP. Would you not agree?


Ian

[Arborbridge]

What we can say is that here's a company which weathered the worst financial crisis in our generation when other big financials were going bust and since then has show an excellent enthusiasm to re-established its dividend value.
It isn't all "hopeless" but it isn't great either!

Well I was merely pointing out that the analysis of "Hopeless" for an HYP candidate with such a good dividend record, was rather missing the point of HYP. Would you not agree?


Ian

I question whether Aviva's dividend record could be described as "good". More like "wavy and decreasing slightly"

https://www.dividenddata.co.uk/dividend ... py?epic=Av.

[IanTHughes]

Ian

I am not sure where you get your ten year record of 2.34% for dividend increases. I am not even sure what you mean by that. If you look at the dividend table earlier in this thread you will see that ten years ago the dividend was 33p, today it is apparently 30.0p, assuming that it has been adjusted for any share splits, rights issues and so on. I do not follow the share so I do not know how accurate the table is but on the face of it, that is not much of a record.

Fair enough, my ten year calculation is based on the assumption that this year's final will remain unchanged - 20.75p - with total dividend for 2019 of 30.25p, looking back to 2009 of course. Who knows, it might be even better.

But what is wrong with the 5 year record, or the 3 year? Or do you only base your HYP purchase decisions on a 10 year dividend record?


Ian

[IanTHughes]

What we can say is that here's a company which weathered the worst financial crisis in our generation when other big financials were going bust and since then has show an excellent enthusiasm to re-established its dividend value.
It isn't all "hopeless" but it isn't great either!

Well I was merely pointing out that the analysis of "Hopeless" for an HYP candidate with such a good dividend record, was rather missing the point of HYP. Would you not agree?

I question whether Aviva's dividend record could be described as "good". More like "wavy and decreasing slightly"

Well, all I can say is that a 5 year record of more than 10% increases in Dividend is pretty good for any HYP Candidate for my HYP. Obviously you and Dod101 seem to expect more. Each to their own I guess.


Ian

[monabri]

Here's the data on Aviva in terms of dividends are growth rates sourced from DividendData.

Unless the final dividend is significantly increased by more than 2.7% (sorry but that's the increase not 3% for the interim) then it looks as the CAGR is slowing.

Maybe we will get a special if they do sell out their Asia side of the business but I don't hold my breathe. I said earlier that I was disappointed with the increase..slightly better than CPI but lower than RPI.




I had a top up choice this morning ...LGEN won.

[Dod101]

[Well, all I can say is that a 5 year record of more than 10% increases in Dividend is pretty good for any HYP Candidate for my HYP. Obviously you and Dod101 seem to expect more. Each to their own I guess.

I for one do not judge my shares on just their dividend record. I look at the company as a whole or 'in the round'. On that basis Aviva's record is not very good and quite unreliable. Half in jest I commented that it must be approaching the time for a rebasing of the dividend again, such is its record. Like several other companies, Standard Chartered and BP to name but two, it is accident prone. I simply will not hold them.

That attitude kept me away from RBS in 2007/8 and from Carillion much later.

Dod

[IanTHughes]

[Well, all I can say is that a 5 year record of more than 10% increases in Dividend is pretty good for any HYP Candidate for my HYP. Obviously you and Dod101 seem to expect more. Each to their own I guess.

I for one do not judge my shares on just their dividend record.

Quite right, nor do I. We are talking about HYP after all!


Ian

[miner1000]

From their record (I do not hold) it must be getting near to the time of another rebasing of their dividend. This is simply a hopeless share.

Dod

Actually Dod, far from hopeless. As with all things it depends when you bought. I bought Aviva between 2009 and 2013 at an average price of 335.42 pence per share. Now, the following calc is not perfect because of dividend lag relative to my purchases, but relative to the total amount spent I have received back 64.4% of the total spent capital in dividends since 2009. The price is up to a current yield of around 8%, and more than 9% on my original purchase price. If the dividend is merely held for the next 4 years I will have all my original investment back.

Hardly the performance of a dog?

Miner

[moorfield]

Well I was merely pointing out that the analysis of "Hopeless" for an HYP candidate with such a good dividend record, was rather missing the point of HYP. Would you not agree?

I think that a point that has been missed on a thread such as this - yet again - is the individual share's contribution to overall portfolio income. Recall that "inflation crushing" HYP1 continues to hold RSA.

If one's overall portfolio income continues to rise, why the jerky knees and itchy fingers?

[Alaric]

Hardly the performance of a dog?

The morningstar site gives retrospective analysis of how a share has performed relative to the FTSE 100 Index.
http://tools.morningstar.co.uk/uk/stock ... E%24%24ALL

For Aviva this gives 3, 5 and 10 year total returns of 3.54%, 0.63% and 4.93%. The comparative FTSE 100 values being 6.70%, 6.29% and 8.44%.

Legal & General has 9.62%, 5.58% and 18.02%
Phoenix 8.96%, 10.85%, no 10 year record recorded

[Dod101]

Well I was merely pointing out that the analysis of "Hopeless" for an HYP candidate with such a good dividend record, was rather missing the point of HYP. Would you not agree?

I think that a point that has been missed on a thread such as this - yet again - is the individual share's contribution to overall portfolio income. Recall that "inflation crushing" HYP1 continues to hold RSA.

If one's overall portfolio income continues to rise, why the jerky knees and itchy fingers?

So if you have enough good shares you do not mid the odd dud? (I am not saying that Aviva is a dud) What have jerky knees and itchy fingers got to do with it? I am advocating not buying shares like Aviva in the first place. There is no doubt that holding a portfolio is much better than holding one share but we all knew that didn't we?

Few seem to get it, but a share like Aviva with a poor record over many years is best avoided.

Dod

[IanTHughes]

Well I was merely pointing out that the analysis of "Hopeless" for an HYP candidate with such a good dividend record, was rather missing the point of HYP. Would you not agree?

I think that a point that has been missed on a thread such as this - yet again - is the individual share's contribution to overall portfolio income. Recall that "inflation crushing" HYP1 continues to hold RSA.

If one's overall portfolio income continues to rise, why the jerky knees and itchy fingers?

So if you have enough good shares you do not mid the odd dud? (I am not saying that Aviva is a dud) What have jerky knees and itchy fingers got to do with it? I am advocating not buying shares like Aviva in the first place. There is no doubt that holding a portfolio is much better than holding one share but we all knew that didn't we?

Few seem to get it, but a share like Aviva with a poor record over many years is best avoided.

So what you are saying in essence is:

1) A share brought into an HYP 5 years ago, since when it has produced double-digit dividend increases, has been an HYP failure?
2) A high yield share with a 5 year history of double-digit dividend increases is best avoided by an HYPer?

Are you sure?


Ian

[Arborbridge]

Well, all I can say is that a 5 year record of more than 10% increases in Dividend is pretty good for any HYP Candidate for my HYP. Obviously you and Dod101 seem to expect more. Each to their own I guess.


Ian

I've acknowledged the good bit - the five year record. But I think you are ignoring the longer record and choosing your entry point just to create an argument: I know you love one!

If you take a longer view, Aviva's record does not compare well with other HYP shares and that has to be a concern - a yellow card rather than a sending off. Just check the longer record on the link I gave and the dividends waver up and down and in general have reduced. It is this which should concern potential investors and if a reliable long term record is "expecting more" then so be it.

I believe I've made the point adequately, and do not see any reason to continue the argument.

Arb.

[Dod101]

I think that a point that has been missed on a thread such as this - yet again - is the individual share's contribution to overall portfolio income. Recall that "inflation crushing" HYP1 continues to hold RSA.

If one's overall portfolio income continues to rise, why the jerky knees and itchy fingers?

So if you have enough good shares you do not mid the odd dud? (I am not saying that Aviva is a dud) What have jerky knees and itchy fingers got to do with it? I am advocating not buying shares like Aviva in the first place. There is no doubt that holding a portfolio is much better than holding one share but we all knew that didn't we?

Few seem to get it, but a share like Aviva with a poor record over many years is best avoided.

So what you are saying in essence is:

1) A share brought into an HYP 5 years ago, since when it has produced double-digit dividend increases, has been an HYP failure?
2) A high yield share with a 5 year history of double-digit dividend increases is best avoided by an HYPer?

Are you sure?

This will be my last post on this as I think I have made my views clear. For a short term HYPer, the evidence of the last five years is fine, but if you look at the history of Aviva and the nature of the company over the longer term it is pretty poor.

Dod

[IanTHughes]

Well, all I can say is that a 5 year record of more than 10% increases in Dividend is pretty good for any HYP Candidate for my HYP. Obviously you and Dod101 seem to expect more. Each to their own I guess.

I've acknowledged the good bit - the five year record. But I think you are ignoring the longer record and choosing your entry point just to create an argument: I know you love one!

If you take a longer view, Aviva's record does not compare well with other HYP shares and that has to be a concern - a yellow card rather than a sending off.

In order to do that comparison as you suggest, one must first ensure it is not made against an HYP share that has done worse than Aviva PLC (AV). It has I am sure out-performed many, maybe as many as it has under-performed.

Just check the longer record on the link I gave and the dividends waver up and down and in general have reduced. It is this which should concern potential investors and if a reliable long term record is "expecting more" then so be it.

I do not have to check any link as my own Share Database has a full history going back 20 years, as it does for most shares I have even an interest in purchasing.

But the only point that I am trying to make is that, for HYP purposes - this is after all the HYP Practical board - a 5 year history of double-digit percentage dividend increases makes AV, if already held within an HYP, a success and a definite candidate for an HYP that does not already hold it. Certainly far better than the one word dismissive description of "Hopeless"!

You appear to disagree


Ian

[Alaric]

But the only point that I am trying to make is that, for HYP purposes - this is after all the HYP Practical board - a 5 year history of double-digit percentage dividend increases makes AV, if already held within an HYP, a success

Provided you are unconcerned that today's share price is around 80% of what it was five years ago.

[tjh290633]

But the only point that I am trying to make is that, for HYP purposes - this is after all the HYP Practical board - a 5 year history of double-digit percentage dividend increases makes AV, if already held within an HYP, a success

Provided you are unconcerned that today's share price is around 80% of what it was five years ago.

And it is more than it was 6 years ago. Prices do rise and fall, you know.

For the record, I bought in October 2010 at 398p, with dividends running at 26p/year, giving a starting yield of 6.5%. Then the dividend was reduced in 2013, and the share price fell to 310p or so. A gradual increase in dividend saw it at 18.1p for 2014, at which point the price rose to 564p. Since then there have been annual increases to the current 30.25p (final + interim) yet the price has fallen to 388p.

Never mind the quality, feel the width, as was once said. Keep your eye on the dividend.

TJH

[IanTHughes]

But the only point that I am trying to make is that, for HYP purposes - this is after all the HYP Practical board - a 5 year history of double-digit percentage dividend increases makes AV, if already held within an HYP, a success and a definite candidate for an HYP that does not already hold it. Certainly far better than the one word dismissive description of "Hopeless"!

Provided you are unconcerned that today's share price is around 80% of what it was five years ago.

Prices go up and down, what is your point exactly? Has the drop in price affected the Income received in some strange way?


Ian

[Arborbridge]

But the only point that I am trying to make is that, for HYP purposes - this is after all the HYP Practical board - a 5 year history of double-digit percentage dividend increases makes AV, if already held within an HYP, a success and a definite candidate for an HYP that does not already hold it. Certainly far better than the one word dismissive description of "Hopeless"!

You appear to disagree


Ian

I agree "hopeless" is not a good description.
But I'm not tempted further as the discussion has become circular. [Deleted]
Ends.


Arb.

Moderator Message:
Personal bit removed. - Chris