If I invested in (Global) income & growth ITs with a yield less than 4%, would I need to seek higher yields?

[baldchap]

Which is presumably directed at me.

Not totally, it takes two (or more) to tango. Suggestions are valid, but hijacking a thread and debating with another member with totally opposing views when we all know that neither of you will be persuaded otherwise is a sure way to kill the rhythm.

Back on thread, a more interesting point would be suggestions for a basket income/growth pre-retirement, as I believe the choices would be different upon retirement.
Maybe to ponder the question,
'if I invested in (Global) income & growth IT's with a yield less than 4%, would I actually need to seek higher yield upon retirement?'

I think not. Compounding and dividend growth should have done the work for you, which is why as I said JGGI/SAIN/BNKR make up 3/4 of my portfolio.

[dealtn]

Which is presumably directed at me.

Not totally, it takes two (or more) to tango. Suggestions are valid, but hijacking a thread and debating with another member with totally opposing views when we all know that neither of you will be persuaded otherwise is a sure way to kill the rhythm.

Back on thread, a more interesting point would be suggestions for a basket income/growth pre-retirement, as I believe the choices would be different upon retirement.
Maybe to ponder the question,
'if I invested in (Global) income & growth IT's with a yield less than 4%, would I actually need to seek higher yield upon retirement?'

I think not. Compounding and dividend growth should have done the work for you, which is why as I said JGGI/SAIN/BNKR make up 3/4 of my portfolio.

Well to be clear I don't "refuse to countenance that others may choose to apply an investment method different to their own" nor do I believe there is spectrum with labels of HYPP and TR at extreme ends. Whilst the HYPP end might be correctly labelled TR applies across the entire length of that spectrum, and a more appropriate (derogatory) label needs providing at the other end.

In answer to your question (which requires some assumptions) I would say that IF no income was being drawn down from the portfolio, and all income reinvested (begging the question why it is an Income Strategy of course) then the portfolio would grow with all income return reinvested. The size of the portfolio at the point income drawdown is required would depend upon the total return across that portfolio over its life. So the pot will be largest with the largest total return.

It would be true that a lower return (be that dividend income or total return) would be required to satisfy any income, so a lower (dividend) yield would be required the larger the "pot" for any level of desired income (or longevity). Now, no doubt the accusations on topic drift will occur were discussions to take place as to which strategy, or asset classes, will produce the highest "pot" value. I would say (again) though that I would look at the other question, not maximising the pot, but protecting against a minimum. A portfolio limited to just high (dividend) yielding large cap, UK stocks (even in an IT) might not be sufficiently diversified to provide that protection (and may have higher frictional costs in taxation if outside of an IT and held as individual stocks, or in management charges if held as an IT).

[BullDog]

Needs moving to the IT board?

[Dod101]

Which is presumably directed at me.

Not totally, it takes two (or more) to tango. Suggestions are valid, but hijacking a thread and debating with another member with totally opposing views when we all know that neither of you will be persuaded otherwise is a sure way to kill the rhythm.

Back on thread, a more interesting point would be suggestions for a basket income/growth pre-retirement, as I believe the choices would be different upon retirement.
Maybe to ponder the question,
'if I invested in (Global) income & growth IT's with a yield less than 4%, would I actually need to seek higher yield upon retirement?'

I think not. Compounding and dividend growth should have done the work for you, which is why as I said JGGI/SAIN/BNKR make up 3/4 of my portfolio.

Did this apparently ongoing exchange arrive from outer space? Presumably what is directed at baldchap?

Dod

[MDW1954]

No, it didn't arrive from outer space. It was posted on the other thread after I had asked posters to stay on topic, and in the process of being moved, I think the original post got mislaid. I've looked for it, and can't find it.

Always a bit tricky, carving out new threads from an existing one.

I bolded the selected text in order to make the new question stand out. If anyone stumbles across the original post, please let me know and I'll have a go at slotting it into place.

MDW1954

[tjh290633]

Back on thread, a more interesting point would be suggestions for a basket income/growth pre-retirement, as I believe the choices would be different upon retirement.
Maybe to ponder the question,
'if I invested in (Global) income & growth IT's with a yield less than 4%, would I actually need to seek higher yield upon retirement?'

This takes us back to the Total Return argument. You might get a higher total return from ITs with a higher yield. This was certainly the case for a long period, as an examination of the records of the FTSE350 High Yield and Low Yield indexes (HIX and LIX) will reveal.

My chosen method of investment is to maximise dividend income, using a fairly wide spread of ordinary shares. My IRR since 1987 has been 9.6%, although about the turn of the century it was nearer 13%. Currently the yield is about 4.6%, which obviously varies according to the capital value if income stays fairly level. In recent years there have been rises and falls. This is the record of the change in cash dividends since the turn of the century:

Finacial     Cash Divs
Year to      % Change 
05-Apr-00       45.60%
05-Apr-01       26.11%
05-Apr-02       15.10%
05-Apr-03        3.72%
05-Apr-04       24.84%
05-Apr-05        2.01%
05-Apr-06       45.46%
05-Apr-07       17.49%
05-Apr-08       40.76%
05-Apr-09      -12.23%
05-Apr-10      -46.02%
05-Apr-11       41.95%
05-Apr-12       23.25%
05-Apr-13       23.68%
05-Apr-14        9.49%
05-Apr-15       11.84%
05-Apr-16       -5.51%
05-Apr-17       26.59%
05-Apr-18       21.38%
05-Apr-19        0.16%
05-Apr-20       10.58%
05-Apr-21      -23.88%
05-Apr-22       23.28%
05-Apr-23       11.03%

For most of this time there has been reinvestement of dividends and some capital additions from time to time. You can see where major falls occurred and the subsequent recovery. Were I to be living off the income, less would be reinvested, and so there would be a lower level of increases. However this is likely to be less than 5% of the change in dividends, if that.

TJH