Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to GrahamPlatt,gpadsa,Steffers0,lansdown,Wasron, for Donating to support the site

HSBC Holdings

For discussion of the practicalities of setting up and operating income-portfolios which follow the HYP Group Guidelines. READ Guidelines before posting
Forum rules
Tight HYP discussions only please - OT please discuss in strategies
Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64164

Postby Gengulphus » July 1st, 2017, 1:09 pm

gbalin wrote:To answer your question. I would hope that you are alone in your thinking because as fisher says, the purchase yield has got nothing to do with it. It is the current price and yield that matters not what you paid.

Dod


Can anyone enlighten a longtime lurker and investing newbie? I can understand that it is the current yield that can be compared with other investments, but as a matter of principle in maintaining a HYP, should it not be the purchase yield that is kept in mind? eg I bought 10K of CPI because I liked the yield and reckoned the company was a 'keeper'. Then the price dropped by nearly 50%! However, I am still getting the yield so I should just keep my original aims in view, surely?

No, you're not still getting the original yield. You are getting the original income, but "income" and "yield" do not mean the same thing. Yield is income divided by capital value, so it's perfectly possible for the income to remain the same and the yield to change - it just requires the capital value to change, which for typical HYP shares is generally something that happens just about every minute of every trading day!

Looking at your example of Capita (CPI), I'll assume for the sake of an example with simple numbers that you bought it at a price of 1000p sometime around April 2016. So you got 1000 shares for your £10k, and on the historical dividend of 31.7p declared in February 2016 had annual income from the holding of £317. Your historical yield at the time was £317/£10k = 3.17%.

Towards the end of 2016, the share price plummeted to around 500p, so the capital value of the holding dropped to about £5k. The historical dividend from the shares was still 31.7p and so the annual income from the 1000-share holding was still £317 - but the yield was then about £317/£5k = 6.34%.

Now the share price is 691.5p and so the capital value of the holding is £6,915. The company held its dividend at 31.7p this year, so the annual income is still £317 - and the yield is now £317/£6,915 = 4.58%. You've had the same income throughout, which I think is what you're trying to get at, but the yield you've been getting has been varying dramatically as a consequence of the share price also varying dramatically.

An important difference between income and yield figures is what they're most useful for. In a nutshell:

* Income figures are most useful for seeing how you're doing while you're holding shares - your unchanged CPI income correctly reflects your feeling that you're "still getting the yield", it's just not the right word to describe it (*). Incidentally, dividend-per-share figures usually give you essentially the same information as income figures - but some corporate actions such as share splits / consolidations and rights issues require them to be adjusted to make the information match up completely.

* Yield figures are most useful when talking about buying and selling decisions. The fact that your CPI holding has a yield of 4.58% says that if you were to sell it and use the proceeds to buy another share, that would increase the income you were getting from your HYP if the other share had a yield above 4.58% and decrease it if it had a yield below 4.58% (**). E.g. if you were to sell the Capita holding, you would have £6,915 to spend on something else. If you spent it on a replacement which yielded 4%, you would have £276.60 income from that holding - less than the £317 you were receiving before - and if the replacement instead yielded 5%, you would have £345.75 income from the holding - more than it. The holding's current yield of 4.58% correctly tells you about that - its previous yields of 3.17% and 6.34% don't even come close...

So basically, judge holding by what has happened to the income while holding; judge trading decisions by the yields.

(*) And to be fair, you saying that you're "still getting the yield" when you mean "still getting the income" isn't really all that much of a problem - it's a common enough mistake and people will generally see what you mean. The real problem occurs when you extend that mistake to your understanding of what other people are saying - in this case, people are discussing selling HSBC in order to buy other shares with the proceeds, i.e. trading decisions, and so they really do mean "yield". If you read that to mean income, you will misunderstand them!

(**) Well, actually it's slightly different from that due to the effect of trading costs - but I've been ignoring those in this post to avoid unnecessary obfuscation of what's really going on!

Gengulphus

gbalin
Posts: 24
Joined: November 13th, 2016, 3:51 pm
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64201

Postby gbalin » July 1st, 2017, 3:20 pm

@Itsallaguess.Thanks for that. Another useful thread to get stuck into!

gbalin
Posts: 24
Joined: November 13th, 2016, 3:51 pm
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64203

Postby gbalin » July 1st, 2017, 3:22 pm

Gengulphus wrote:
Gengulphus

Wow! You are a scholar and a gentleperson. Many thanks for the enlightenment.
GB

richfool
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3531
Joined: November 19th, 2016, 2:02 pm
Has thanked: 1208 times
Been thanked: 1294 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64246

Postby richfool » July 1st, 2017, 9:35 pm

gbalin wrote:Then the price dropped by nearly 50%! However, I am still getting the yield so I should just keep my original aims in view, surely?

Surely, the only thing technically incorrect in the above quote, is that the poster used the word "yield" as opposed to "income", and therefore surely his intended point was correct. Assuming there is no change in the dividend subsequent to/since purchase, he is getting the same dividend income as when he bought the share, regardless of whether the share price has gone up or down. Wasn't that the point he was validly trying to make.

He acknowledged "it is the current yield that can be compared with other investments" (if and when making subsequent decisions.)

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4140 times
Been thanked: 10032 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64253

Postby Itsallaguess » July 1st, 2017, 10:55 pm

richfool wrote:
gbalin wrote:
Then the price dropped by nearly 50%! However, I am still getting the yield so I should just keep my original aims in view, surely?


Surely, the only thing technically incorrect in the above quote, is that the poster used the word "yield" as opposed to "income", and therefore surely his intended point was correct. Assuming there is no change in the dividend subsequent to/since purchase, he is getting the same dividend income as when he bought the share, regardless of whether the share price has gone up or down. Wasn't that the point he was validly trying to make.

He acknowledged "it is the current yield that can be compared with other investments" (if and when making subsequent decisions.)


It's such a terribly important distinction, though, that it's entirely correct that each and every time the mistake is made, it is clearly pointed out why it is one.

To not do so would be a derriliction of duty for those that know the danger in misunderstanding the difference....

Itsallaguess

* ignore all speling mistaks....

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64272

Postby Gengulphus » July 2nd, 2017, 3:36 am

richfool wrote:
gbalin wrote:Then the price dropped by nearly 50%! However, I am still getting the yield so I should just keep my original aims in view, surely?

Surely, the only thing technically incorrect in the above quote, is that the poster used the word "yield" as opposed to "income", and therefore surely his intended point was correct. ...

Yes, that's the only thing wrong with that quote. If you look at the longer quote I gave, though, gbalin was responding to Dod1010's correct use of "yield" and asking for enlightenment in a way that indicated some confusion that he or she wanted cleared up. And I did confirm that his underlying point was correct, e.g. when I said "... your unchanged CPI income correctly reflects your feeling that you're "still getting the yield", ...".

Gengulphus

Dod1010
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1058
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:18 am
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 164 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64315

Postby Dod1010 » July 2nd, 2017, 1:38 pm

It may already have been covered but a definition of yield in investing terms might be useful.

The yield is the percentage derived from taking the actual income from a share over any given year and dividing it by the share price at the end of that given year. At least that is my definition, others will have a different one as some will use the projected or forecast income for the next year. The point is the yield is a percentage of the share price not the income expressed in cash terms.

So the yield on purchase of any given share might be 3.0% (say a share price of £10 and a dividend of 30p) The income is needless to say 30 pence. If the dividend stays the same (that is the income is unchanged over a given period) but in that period the price falls to £7, the yield has risen to 4.29%. Maybe time to buy more, or is it a falling knife...........? So the yield in percentage terms has risen but the income derived is unchanged.

So pyad's comment was correct because if you are comparing one share with another in terms of its yield, it is the current yield that matters and not the historical yield. I started this thread by commenting that I have sold some HSBC (at a current yield of probably just under 6%) and like Ian I am going to be hard pushed to maintain that yield unless I am prepared to go downmarket (I think that HSBC's dividend is secure, which is more than can be said for some shares with that sort of yield) As anyone can see from that comment understanding what I mean by yield is very important.

All clear? This is the sort of post that if I get it wrong..................

Dod

gbalin
Posts: 24
Joined: November 13th, 2016, 3:51 pm
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64334

Postby gbalin » July 2nd, 2017, 4:13 pm

Very clear, thank you. However, coming back to the thread topic [finally, they say], from what you describe about your decision to sell HSBC, isn't it going to be the forecast yield that is important? [I'm assuming that forecast yield is ' Forward dividend yield is calculated by dividing a year's worth of future dividend payments by a stock's current share price'.
If you feel the SP is going to go down in the coming year, then the yield will actually increase, will it not? This would mean you are even less likely to get that matched by another stock.
You mentioned I think that it was in an ISA so you would not be selling to realise capital. So what am I not getting here?
GB

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64341

Postby Gengulphus » July 2nd, 2017, 5:24 pm

gbalin wrote:Very clear, thank you. However, coming back to the thread topic [finally, they say], from what you describe about your decision to sell HSBC, isn't it going to be the forecast yield that is important? [I'm assuming that forecast yield is ' Forward dividend yield is calculated by dividing a year's worth of future dividend payments by a stock's current share price'.

Both historical and forecast yields have their flaws - historical yields mainly because they often remain misleadingly out of date for a long time after a company has made it clear it's going to cut its dividend, forecast yields mainly because forecasters can (and not infrequently do!) get it wrong. To a certain extent, each of them covers the other's flaws, so I personally use both and investigate any discrepancies from the normal pattern that the forecast yield is typically a bit higher than the historical yield - and in addition make certain I look at the last set of results and/or trading statement to see what they say about the dividend (that's because even though forecast dividends respond more quickly than historical dividends to announcements that a company is planning to cut its dividend or review its dividend policy, they still take some time to respond).

Gengulphus

Dod1010
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1058
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:18 am
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 164 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64345

Postby Dod1010 » July 2nd, 2017, 5:47 pm

gbalin wrote:Very clear, thank you. However, coming back to the thread topic [finally, they say], from what you describe about your decision to sell HSBC, isn't it going to be the forecast yield that is important? [I'm assuming that forecast yield is ' Forward dividend yield is calculated by dividing a year's worth of future dividend payments by a stock's current share price'.
If you feel the SP is going to go down in the coming year, then the yield will actually increase, will it not? This would mean you are even less likely to get that matched by another stock.
You mentioned I think that it was in an ISA so you would not be selling to realise capital. So what am I not getting here?
GB


Basically as I think I said in the first post, I was taking advantage of the sharp uptick in the price so I simply sold some which I had bought at £6.40 or thereabouts about six weeks earlier with a trading opportunity in mind. Furthermore, HSBC was nearly my biggest holding so I was not unhappy to reduce it a bit. As to a replacement I will almost certainly sacrifice some income but that is too bad.

Gengulphus is of course correct as to historical or forecast yields; that is why I think it is important when quoting a yield to try to define what you mean.

As to HSBC, the forecast yield? Well, I am prepared to believe that they will not cut their dividend and I have felt for some time that the price is too low on that basis, so I think the forward yield will be downwards as the price rises. However I prefer to look at the dividend and thus the yield I am receiving on the current price.

I will usually only sell if there is a cut to the dividend or if a share is becoming too large a component of my HYP. However, if the yield gets under say 3% I will usually see if I can find a suitable replacement at a higher yield. OTOH capital does matter and if the yield has dropped because of a good rise in price that is a pleasant dilemma.

Dod

fisher
Lemon Slice
Posts: 389
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:18 pm
Has thanked: 352 times
Been thanked: 201 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64358

Postby fisher » July 2nd, 2017, 8:30 pm

Dod1010 wrote:Basically as I think I said in the first post, I was taking advantage of the sharp uptick in the price so I simply sold some which I had bought at £6.40 or thereabouts about six weeks earlier with a trading opportunity in mind. Furthermore, HSBC was nearly my biggest holding so I was not unhappy to reduce it a bit. As to a replacement I will almost certainly sacrifice some income but that is too bad.
Dod


And this is part of the confusion I think. You are describing an action taken on a near pure trading basis which has very little, if anything, to do with HYP. People then try to understand why you've done this as a HYP investor.

Dod1010
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1058
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:18 am
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 164 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64369

Postby Dod1010 » July 2nd, 2017, 9:33 pm

fisher wrote:
Dod1010 wrote:Basically as I think I said in the first post, I was taking advantage of the sharp uptick in the price so I simply sold some which I had bought at £6.40 or thereabouts about six weeks earlier with a trading opportunity in mind. Furthermore, HSBC was nearly my biggest holding so I was not unhappy to reduce it a bit. As to a replacement I will almost certainly sacrifice some income but that is too bad.
Dod


And this is part of the confusion I think. You are describing an action taken on a near pure trading basis which has very little, if anything, to do with HYP. People then try to understand why you've done this as a HYP investor.


My first post of this thread gives you the answer. Certainly my action was not a HYP one but I never claimed it to be so nor did I intend that I would get mired in explaining it. I am a HYP investor and passionately believe in the HYP philosophy but that does not preclude one from indulging in a little bit of trading 'on the side'. I am happy to continue this but I am not sure it will elucidate much more of what I am about.

Dod

idpickering
The full Lemon
Posts: 11439
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:04 pm
Has thanked: 2480 times
Been thanked: 5822 times

Re: HSBC Holdings

#64396

Postby idpickering » July 3rd, 2017, 7:01 am

Dod1010 wrote:
My first post of this thread gives you the answer. Certainly my action was not a HYP one but I never claimed it to be so nor did I intend that I would get mired in explaining it. I am a HYP investor and passionately believe in the HYP philosophy but that does not preclude one from indulging in a little bit of trading 'on the side'. I am happy to continue this but I am not sure it will elucidate much more of what I am about.

Dod


Quite right Dod. It's your HYP to manage as you like. Some here can be overly pedantic.

Ian.


Return to “HYP Practical (See Group Guidelines)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests