Unilever Results

[kempiejon]

Unilever came into range for my HYP in Oct 2009 at 1837p, yielding 4.2% in dividends over the next 12 months. Quick look at the 10 year yield chart https://www.dividenddata.co.uk/dividend ... ?epic=ULVR and I appear to have been pretty fortunate in hitting a good historic yield.

[IanTHughes]

Since I started in 2012, Unilever Group (ULVR) has been at a yield of 3.5% or less, as far as I am aware. Every time I have funds available to invest there are a number of perfectly adequate HYP candidates with higher yields, sometimes much higher

I do not want to start another controversial discussion but it seems a shame to be missing out on what is an excellent share simply because of a dedication to the (to me rather extreme) principles of a HYP.

I have only missed out on a mediocre yield.

In point of fact, in 2012 if I had invested in Unilever PLC (ULVR) instead of my actual purchases of BAE Systems PLC (BA) and Astrazeneca (AZN), I would have enjoyed an Annual Return from ULVR as measured by XIRR of 13.13%

BA has given me 17.54%
AZN has given me 15.90%

Purchases later in 2012 of HSBC Group Holdings (HSBA) and Britvic PLC (BVIC) have returned 11.86% and 21,20% respectively, so I have not really missed out

Furthermore, all the above continue to pay more in dividends than a purchase of ULVR would be doing, so I have benefitted from considerably more dividend received and of course reinvested than I would have done with ULVR

I do not understand what you mean by extreme dedication to HYP principles. I simply attempt to buy the highest sustainable yield at the time of purchase. I find it strange that you so misunderstand HYP, it really is quite simple


Ian

[moorfield]

I do not understand what you mean by extreme dedication to HYP principles. I simply attempt to buy the highest sustainable yield at the time of purchase. I find it strange that you so misunderstand HYP, it really is quite simple

IanT, I agree there are better yields available elsewhere at present, however imho ULVR would be a perfectly reasonable pick in a HYP today, provided that the overall portfolio yield is high. That's simple to understand also, wouldn't you agree?

[idpickering]

I do not understand what you mean by extreme dedication to HYP principles. I simply attempt to buy the highest sustainable yield at the time of purchase. I find it strange that you so misunderstand HYP, it really is quite simple

IanT, I agree there are better yields available elsewhere at present, however imho ULVR would be a perfectly reasonable pick in a HYP today, provided that the overall portfolio yield is high. That's simple to understand also, wouldn't you agree?

I agree moorfield. As I mentioned in my post further up this thread, I tend to look at my overall HYP average yield, and cut the lower yielders some slack. It is a portfolio after all.

Ian.

[Raptor]

I do not understand what you mean by extreme dedication to HYP principles. I simply attempt to buy the highest sustainable yield at the time of purchase. I find it strange that you so misunderstand HYP, it really is quite simple

IanT, I agree there are better yields available elsewhere at present, however imho ULVR would be a perfectly reasonable pick in a HYP today, provided that the overall portfolio yield is high. That's simple to understand also, wouldn't you agree?

I agree moorfield. As I mentioned in my post further up this thread, I tend to look at my overall HYP average yield, and cut the lower yielders some slack. It is a portfolio after all.

Ian.

I am not disagreeing that having ULVR in a HYP is not a bad idea. However, surely on this board suggesting "purchasing" them for your HYP is way outside the guidelines of HYP practical board. Taking the above then, say, me purchasing TESCO would be ok as it does not affect the overall return on my portfolio. This is really a topic for Strategies, but we really need to look at what HYP Practical's purpose is and keep (as much as possible) within the guidelines set up by Admin. If we really want to talk about rounding out your HYP then strategies would be a great place.

IanT statement above does not fit within the guidelines, IMO.

Raptor.

[Dod101]

I do not understand what you mean by extreme dedication to HYP principles. I simply attempt to buy the highest sustainable yield at the time of purchase. I find it strange that you so misunderstand HYP, it really is quite simple

I understand the HYP system quite well I think. I just do not adhere to it very strictly because for me some modifications work better. I am a long term buy and hold investor in the main and in fact have held Unilever for instance for more than 20 years without ever buying or selling any of it. I have to some extent bought and sold some of the other suspects but again I have held HSBC since 1991, Legal & General, Glaxo, Astra, both tobaccos, and Shell for over 20 years so I well understand the HYP. But I also hold some ITs and of course Unilever. With a yield of around 3% it is not the highest yielder but it has been a great performer and very reliable and that is why I hold it. It has as I said become my largest holding so I may trim it before too long but I think I will wait until the current restructuring has been completed.

As I said I have no wish to enter into another long discussion and you must do what you feel best.

Dod

[kempiejon]

I refined my strategy of only picking from yields above the FTSE100 and now prefer to add at or above my portfolio yield. When I bought ULVR I do not know for sure what my portfolio yield or the index was but > 4% seems likely so my addition at 4.2% was in. Today, with ULVR yielding below the FTSE100 3.9% and my HYP 4.3% I wouldn't short list them for new money. If starting a new HYP I'd prefer all the picks were above the FTSE100 yield but as I'd list the FTSE350 by yield and work down picking the highest per sector that cover my safety needs, that would dictate portfolio yield. As I have a mature HYP I make sure I add to increase or maintain portfolio yield. I do not agree that a low/no yielder could be added to my HYP if the portfolio average is still high but I do not sell when yield falls. I am content to have ULVR in my HYP, the income growth has been better that some of my higher yielders bought around the same time but it's not a buy for my HYP, there's plenty of high yields available.

[dspp]

Moderator Message:
I've moved this.

The HYP practical board is for companies that are now, or were in the past, HYP shares for those practicing that faith.

If ULVR was ever a HYP candidate then it can only have been for a blink of an eye and so does not really count. Unless you are in angels on pins territory.

ULVR has many excellent qualities as an investment choice, so this is no criticism of ULVR. Indeed I know many here hold ULVR, just that it was not ever (?*) a pure HYP purchase.

Just glancing at the discussion below in any case many of you are yacking about how to implement one or other HY strategy, so you are definitely off the beaten track of the HYP faith, so this needed to move to the correct board.

So it was moved on two counts.

regards, dspp


* except for that blink of an eye that I am sure one of you will now trawl to find, to prove me wrong. Which isn't really the point.

[IanTHughes]

IanT, I agree there are better yields available elsewhere at present, however imho ULVR would be a perfectly reasonable pick in a HYP today, provided that the overall portfolio yield is high. That's simple to understand also, wouldn't you agree?

Yes, simple to understand that you do not follow an HYP strategy as I do. Once again, my Investment Strategy is to obtain the highest sustainable yield at the point of purchase, with a requirement not to over-concentrate the portfolio.

ULVR does not get a look in because my “sustainability” criteria do not reject enough of the High Yields currently available. In order for my HYP strategy to select ULVR I should have to drop the requirement to take the Highest Yield on offer. Of course, that would be a portfolio that would not qualify for discussion on the High Yield Portfolios Practical (HYP) Board


Ian

[PinkDalek]

IanT statement above does not fit within the guidelines, IMO.

I don't understand (knowing full well that the Topic has been moved) as the IanTHughes post includes:

Once again, my Investment Strategy is to obtain the highest sustainable yield at the point of purchase, with a requirement not to over-concentrate the portfolio.

In what way doesn't this fit the Guidance applicable to High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical?

[melonfool]

Moderator Message:
I have removed posts that are discussing a moderation decision, you chaps know this is not acceptable in-thread. All that has happened is that the topic has been moved. It's not a major deal really. Have a nice cup of tea and carry on reading. If you feel the need to make a post about moderation I suggest you have a biscuit with your tea. Mel

[Raptor]

IanT statement above does not fit within the guidelines, IMO.

I don't understand (knowing full well that the Topic has been moved) as the IanTHughes post includes:

Once again, my Investment Strategy is to obtain the highest sustainable yield at the point of purchase, with a requirement not to over-concentrate the portfolio.

In what way doesn't this fit the Guidance applicable to High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical?

Hi PD,

My concern was not on keeping ULVR or topping it up but, currently, ULVR does not meet critieria to purchase "new". Not now relevant as on strategies it is fine.

ULVR has never been a share that has met my criteria but I have watched it and if I was looking to make my HYP safer without cause of yield then it would be there (maybe). I have always taken the FTSE350 and sorted it by my "criteria" then worked down from highest yield when purchasing "new" shares. A process I now do for my daughters HYP. My HYP process has changed over the years as I am now drawing down some of the dividends, hopefully it will be easier now,

Raptor.

[PinkDalek]

IanT statement above does not fit within the guidelines, IMO.

I don't understand (knowing full well that the Topic has been moved) as the IanTHughes post includes:

Once again, my Investment Strategy is to obtain the highest sustainable yield at the point of purchase, with a requirement not to over-concentrate the portfolio.

In what way doesn't this fit the Guidance applicable to High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical?

Hi PD,

My concern was not on keeping ULVR or topping it up but, currently, ULVR does not meet critieria to purchase "new". Not now relevant as on strategies it is fine. …

Hi Raptor,

Thanks for your reply and I'm possibly being thick but I still don't see why IanTHughes' post (I quoted from the wrong one btw but the gist was the same) was not within the High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical Guidelines. He was saying broadly what you've just said. Not one to buy as a new HYP share (currently). Perhaps you didn't mean "IanT".

Nor are they currently one to buy for High Yield (now we are here) but, as you and many others have said, they fit neatly into many portfolios.

I've never held (I hold Nestle and all that entails) but the other half has a good chunk and thus my interest, wherever the posts end up.

PD

[Raptor]

Moderator Message:
Have added a shadow on Practical to this on Strategy. I believe that was the original intention from reading other posts. Hope this helps everyone find this thread. Raptor.

[Raptor]

I don't understand (knowing full well that the Topic has been moved) as the IanTHughes post includes:

Once again, my Investment Strategy is to obtain the highest sustainable yield at the point of purchase, with a requirement not to over-concentrate the portfolio.

In what way doesn't this fit the Guidance applicable to High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical?

Hi PD,

My concern was not on keeping ULVR or topping it up but, currently, ULVR does not meet critieria to purchase "new". Not now relevant as on strategies it is fine. …

Hi Raptor,

Thanks for your reply and I'm possibly being thick but I still don't see why IanTHughes' post (I quoted from the wrong one btw but the gist was the same) was not within the High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical Guidelines. He was saying broadly what you've just said. Not one to buy as a new HYP share (currently). Perhaps you didn't mean "IanT".

Nor are they currently one to buy for High Yield (now we are here) but, as you and many others have said, they fit neatly into many portfolios.

I've never held (I hold Nestle and all that entails) but the other half has a good chunk and thus my interest, wherever the posts end up.

PD

Thanks PD, you are right like you I misquoted. My tablet is a "dog" to work with and missed that earlier. Now on laptop so can be a bit more creative?

What I was trying to quote was someone who was suggesting that ULVR should be in every HYP, although not meeting the guidliines. As you say irrelavant now.

I would say to those that have said and still say it has never been a HYP share, I believe it has been (maybe briefly) in the past and thus is acceptable for discussion on Practical and to be seen in people's HYP.

I have had some very marginal shares in my HYP in the past, but when I purchased them they met the critieria at that specific time. Although at the beginning my choices and criteria were still being formed, thanks a lot ot the TMF crew in those days.

Raptor.

[PinkDalek]

Now understood, thanks. If anyone has missed it, there is a discussion on the move at the Biscuit Bar.

[IanTHughes]

I do not understand what you mean by extreme dedication to HYP principles. I simply attempt to buy the highest sustainable yield at the time of purchase. I find it strange that you so misunderstand HYP, it really is quite simple

I understand the HYP system quite well I think.

Do you? In that case why do you believe that making a selection on the basis of the best sustainable yield is:

a dedication to the (to me rather extreme) principles of a HYP.

So, in your book, rejecting High Yields in favour of Mediocre Yields is run of the mill HYP behaviour, while not rejecting those same High Yields is taking "dedication to HYP principles to the extreme".

A rather bizarre interpretation of the HYP Strategy if you ask me



Ian

[Dod101]

Well we are now on the Strategies Board so I guess we can happily discuss this without going off topic. I do not reject high yields as such; of course not but I have become, as time has gone by, a lot more conservative than I used to be. Actually I suppose I should be just the opposite because nowadays I think I can afford to take more risks than I could in my younger days.

As you must know, there are those disciples of pyad or at least of his principles and there are those who modify HYP to what they feel more comfortable with. I am in the latter category. Thus I hold Unilever in my HYP and I also include some higher yielding Investment trusts. I have a small concentrated HYP portfolio of around 19/20 individual shares and so the ITs give me a wider spread as well as a steadily increasing dividend. I am very wary of shares yielding more than around the FTSE100 yield plus say 50% and will seldom buy them. That philosophy has meant that I have had few failures, by which I mean dividend suspensions and only a very few where the dividend has been cut (Centrica was probably the last one).

I completely understand pyad's ideas which I suspect were designed with the average Doris in mind. In other words hands off income where you simply let things run, not even selling say RBS in 2008! I never held RBS because I disliked Fred and the chairman George Matthewson, who employed him. But on the subject of HYP, you should read Luniversal's conclusions about the performance of his HYP over I think a seven year period. He is not altogether enthusiastic.

I have never claimed that my style is run of the mill HYP behaviour. In fact I hope it is not run of the mill anything because I like to think that I am ploughing a fairly independent furrow.

I wish you well but in your shoes, where I think you said that you are not drawing any income, I would be looking to widen my exposure a bit, but that is not my business and you are obviously content as is. I genuinely wish you well, and in the long run it will not matter. We will all be dead.

Dod

[Dod101]

And for all you good people that do not buy into Unilever note that they have closed this evening at £43.61 which is I think about their highest ever price. Money is money is money whether it is called a dividend or a capital gain (that is why it is sometimes called fungible)

Dod

[Walrus]

And for all you good people that do not buy into Unilever note that they have closed this evening at £43.61 which is I think about their highest ever price. Money is money is money whether it is called a dividend or a capital gain (that is why it is sometimes called fungible)

Dod

Some will tell you its all about having a very specific subset of shares yielding between 4.5 and 6 percent in the ftse 350. Anything outside of that and you are not a disciple. Don't ever dare sell anything either.....