Donate to Remove ads

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

Thanks to Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34,Anonymous, for Donating to support the site

Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

General discussions about equity high-yield income strategies
IanTHughes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1789
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 730 times
Been thanked: 1117 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221773

Postby IanTHughes » May 15th, 2019, 11:51 am

Lootman wrote:Bland's main edge was that, as an accountant, he understands balance sheets. If you believe that you can gain an edge by reading them, then good for you. Personally I have never read one in my life

Now there's a surprise


Ian

Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6025
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1396 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221777

Postby Alaric » May 15th, 2019, 12:04 pm

IanTHughes wrote:I personally, would much prefer an initial 7% yield with a growing dividend to an initial 3% yield with a growing dividend.


A 3% yield growing at 8% is a higher rate of return than a 7% yield growing at 2%.

I hold Compass. Until I fortuitously sold I also held Carillion. Carillion was on a much higher yield than Compass. Which was the better buy and what would the HYP guidelines and filters of 5 years ago have had you buy?

If you want dividend growth, it would a better filter to add the dividend and growth rate together and sort on that. With that method, you don't reject performers such as Compass, Unilever etc. because their dividend performance has pushed the share price up and the initial dividend yield down.

CryptoPlankton
Lemon Slice
Posts: 786
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1543 times
Been thanked: 873 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221778

Postby CryptoPlankton » May 15th, 2019, 12:08 pm

It amazes me how this whole argument keeps staggering on round and round in circles. If, as is clearly the case, there are people who are content with their use of the HYP strategy then of course it works. Is it the very best long-term total return investment strategy? Almost certainly not - it isn't designed for that. But it generally appears to do what it says on the tin. It seems those that carefully read the tin are satisfied with that and those that don't seem to expect it to perform some function that it wasn't intended for. Horses for course and all that...

IanTHughes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1789
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 730 times
Been thanked: 1117 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221782

Postby IanTHughes » May 15th, 2019, 12:18 pm

Alaric wrote:
IanTHughes wrote:I personally, would much prefer an initial 7% yield with a growing dividend to an initial 3% yield with a growing dividend.


A 3% yield growing at 8% is a higher rate of return than a 7% yield growing at 2%.

So what? Which would produce the better Income result that HYP strives for?

And a 3% yield growing at 8% is a lower rate of return than a 7% yield growing at 8%.

So what?

Alaric wrote:If you want dividend growth, it would a better filter to add the dividend and growth rate together and sort on that. With that method, you don't reject performers such as Compass, Unilever etc. because their dividend performance has pushed the share price up and the initial dividend yield down.

So I was right. You would select a 3% yield with a growing dividend rather than a 7% yield, with a growing dividend. Further, you justify that decision based on your ability as a Fortune Teller!

Well, you must do what you believe is right, I will stick to the reality of the HYP Strategy.


Ian

Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6025
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1396 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221788

Postby Alaric » May 15th, 2019, 12:43 pm

IanTHughes wrote:So what?


Invest for total return. Ignore capital values and you mislead yourself. If you invest £ 10,000 in shares, receive £1,000 in dividend a year later, but the shares are now worth £ 9,000, that's just the same as if you didn't bother to invest at all and spent £ 1,000.

Invest £ 10,000 notionally at a 2% dividend yield but it increases at 10% before you receive it a year later.

So that's £ 200 in dividend and an extra £ 20 in dividend increase. Presuming the share continues to be priced at a 2% yield, it's now going to be worth £ 11000. So you've got £ 220 in dividend and £ 11000 in share value. If you need more than £ 220 as income, sell enough gain to meet your income requirement. If you don't have an income requirement just reinvest the £ 220.

Charlottesquare
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1768
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:22 pm
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 559 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221789

Postby Charlottesquare » May 15th, 2019, 12:46 pm

Alaric wrote:
IanTHughes wrote:I personally, would much prefer an initial 7% yield with a growing dividend to an initial 3% yield with a growing dividend.


A 3% yield growing at 8% is a higher rate of return than a 7% yield growing at 2%.

I hold Compass. Until I fortuitously sold I also held Carillion. Carillion was on a much higher yield than Compass. Which was the better buy and what would the HYP guidelines and filters of 5 years ago have had you buy?

If you want dividend growth, it would a better filter to add the dividend and growth rate together and sort on that. With that method, you don't reject performers such as Compass, Unilever etc. because their dividend performance has pushed the share price up and the initial dividend yield down.


Gordon model.

Poor re measuring actual share values in my experience but can slightly help with the compare /contrast position of two shares with differing expected growth profiles due to their differing dividend policies, especially if tweaked by say looking at ROCE of the different companies re their earnings retained.

Having said above I no longer bother, it is now mainly ITs for me, as I have got older I have valued my time more so just buy ITs and mainly forget to monitor performance (maybe once every 2-3 months tidy up spreadsheet to calculate current yields, update forecast dividends and make decisions once cash pool reaches critical mass for a purchase 3-4 times a year)

dspp
Lemon Half
Posts: 5884
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 5825 times
Been thanked: 2127 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221790

Postby dspp » May 15th, 2019, 12:48 pm

CryptoPlankton wrote:It amazes me how this whole argument keeps staggering on round and round in circles. If, as is clearly the case, there are people who are content with their use of the HYP strategy then of course it works. Is it the very best long-term total return investment strategy? Almost certainly not - it isn't designed for that. But it generally appears to do what it says on the tin. It seems those that carefully read the tin are satisfied with that and those that don't seem to expect it to perform some function that it wasn't intended for. Horses for course and all that...


CP,

One of the problems is that some people are successfully pursuing a strategy that they call HYP. Let me call them "pragmatic-HYP" types. However it contains some ingredients that are not in the tin labelled "purist-HYP". This poses a dilemma, both for : those who are trying to understand the ?? HYP ?? thingymajig and assess whether it will meet their needs, and then to get on and do it; and also for those who moderate the HYP-P board and have to deal with the sectarian strife over this. And lastly there are some who pursued a strategy that they thought was called ?? HYP ??, but found it didn't work for them and are wondering what the missing ingredient was, or was it them that was error prone.

regards, dspp

IanTHughes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1789
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 730 times
Been thanked: 1117 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221797

Postby IanTHughes » May 15th, 2019, 1:07 pm

Alaric wrote:
IanTHughes wrote:So what?

Invest for total return. Ignore capital values and you mislead yourself.

Please, speak for yourself, I am not misled at all!

Alaric wrote: If you invest £ 10,000 in shares, receive £1,000 in dividend a year later, but the shares are now worth £ 9,000, that's just the same as if you didn't bother to invest at all and spent £ 1,000.

Invest £ 10,000 notionally at a 2% dividend yield but it increases at 10% before you receive it a year later.

So that's £ 200 in dividend and an extra £ 20 in dividend increase. Presuming the share continues to be priced at a 2% yield, it's now going to be worth £ 11000. So you've got £ 220 in dividend and £ 11000 in share value. If you need more than £ 220 as income, sell enough gain to meet your income requirement. If you don't have an income requirement just reinvest the £ 220.

Of course, but now use my crystal ball!

If you invest £ 10,000 in shares, receive £1,000 in dividend a year later, and the shares are now worth £11,000, that means a year later, you have received £1,000 and which, together with the dividend, means you are £1,000 ahead of where you would have been if you didn't bother to invest at all, and have been able to spend £1,000.

Invest £10,000 notionally at a 2% dividend yield but it decreases by 10% before you receive it a year later.

So that's £180 in dividend. Presuming the share continues to be priced at a 1.8% yield, it's now going to be worth £10,000. So you've got £180 in dividend and £10,000 in share value. You would have been better off taking the higher yield.

Seriously, we can all make up scenarios where our chosen strategy comes out best.

However, I cannot see the future with any clarity and neither can you!


Ian

Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6025
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1396 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221798

Postby Alaric » May 15th, 2019, 1:15 pm

IanTHughes wrote:If you invest £ 10,000 in shares, receive £1,000 in dividend a year later, and the shares are now worth £11,000, that means a year later, you have received £1,000 and which, together with the dividend, means you are £1,000 ahead of where you would have been if you didn't bother to invest at all, and have been able to spend £1,000.


Isn't that out at the far end of the likelihood scale? A share so out of favour that its dividend yield hits 10% but then its share price recovers 10%. If you are lucky enough to find one, that's a 20% return.

It remains my belief that just sorting by dividend yield alone finds all the junk. To find some pearls, try sorting by the sum of dividend yield and dividend growth rate.

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1192 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221801

Postby Bouleversee » May 15th, 2019, 1:24 pm

IanTHughes wrote:
Alaric wrote:
IanTHughes wrote:I personally, would much prefer an initial 7% yield with a growing dividend to an initial 3% yield with a growing dividend.


A 3% yield growing at 8% is a higher rate of return than a 7% yield growing at 2%.

So what? Which would produce the better Income result that HYP strives for?

And a 3% yield growing at 8% is a lower rate of return than a 7% yield growing at 8%.

So what?

Alaric wrote:If you want dividend growth, it would a better filter to add the dividend and growth rate together and sort on that. With that method, you don't reject performers such as Compass, Unilever etc. because their dividend performance has pushed the share price up and the initial dividend yield down.

So I was right. You would select a 3% yield with a growing dividend rather than a 7% yield, with a growing dividend. Further, you justify that decision based on your ability as a Fortune Teller!

Well, you must do what you believe is right, I will stick to the reality of the HYP Strategy.


Ian


Nothing to do with ability as a fortune teller so far as I am concerned, just bitter experience. I would certainly rather top up my Compass or my Greggs, WH Smith, James Fisher and various others which have given steady increases on comparatively modest dividends, accompanied by considerable capital growth, than VOD which is enough of risk to continue to hold in my view and not worth the risk of adding. The market today seems to confirm that view. Having been at this game for considerably longer than Ian H. can have been, experience has shown that the HYP approach has simply not worked for me since I was introduced to it, possibly because I haven't done any of the trimming and tinkering and possibly because I started following it at the wrong time.

It is the sustainability of the dividend that counts IMHO and the total return. If it has gone higher because the price has fallen I can see no attraction in that after CLLN, IRV etc. After all, one can always sell off some high performing shares if one needs a bigger income, which not everyone does to start with. However, as you say, we must all do what we believe is right for us and timing and luck play a big part. I have certainly made a lot more money from smaller companies than bigger ones and telecoms have been a complete disaster. Just look at BT's performance since it floated. It is, of course, more difficult to find the niche companies which do well now most of us don't have a good broker to guide us and we practice d.i.y. with limited success in many cases. That could be the other explanation why the profit on my portfolio is nothing like the high percentage it used to be and contains several dogs.

IanTHughes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1789
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 730 times
Been thanked: 1117 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221802

Postby IanTHughes » May 15th, 2019, 1:28 pm

Alaric wrote:
IanTHughes wrote:If you invest £ 10,000 in shares, receive £1,000 in dividend a year later, and the shares are now worth £11,000, that means a year later, you have received £1,000 and which, together with the dividend, means you are £1,000 ahead of where you would have been if you didn't bother to invest at all, and have been able to spend £1,000.

Isn't that out at the far end of the likelihood scale? A share so out of favour that its dividend yield hits 10% but then its share price recovers 10%. If you are lucky enough to find one, that's a 20% return.

What you do not believe my Crystal Ball? Well, in the same vein, I do not believe your Crystal Ball either.

Alaric wrote:It remains my belief that just sorting by dividend yield alone finds all the junk.

I do so agree, as I have told you before in this thread, doing nothing more than sorting by dividend yield would be a very silly strategy in my view as well. That is why I use the HYP Strategy which sorts out High Yielding shares with a growing dividend

I am so glad you agree at last


Ian

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4140 times
Been thanked: 10020 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221806

Postby Itsallaguess » May 15th, 2019, 1:37 pm

The issue I've often had with not chasing yields on single-company HYP components, is that even if you start to concentrate on the slightly lower-levels of yields available, with a view to thinking that they are a bit 'safer' (I wouldn't disagree with that view in general terms by the way, especially for many of the 'ultra-high' relative yields that sometimes look to be 'available'....), you're still left with a lot of 'single-company' risk in terms of a relatively small number of portfolio holdings delivering your income...

And it was at that point that we start to be able to look across to 'broadly similar' yields that might be available via income-related Investment Trusts, which can deliver relatively similar yields to a 'not-chasing-the-yields' HYP, but with the additional benefit of removing the vast bulk of single-company risk (and often other things like geographical market diversity etc...)....

So that's actually where I've ended up, and whilst I won't argue that 'HYP doesn't work', as it clearly does for some people, I have the view that if we're going to personally modify the HYP 'single-company' approach to drop down the yield list, then additional and valuable diversification benefits with very little lost in terms of yield can then actually be delivered via a broadly Investment Trust approach instead....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6025
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1396 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221807

Postby Alaric » May 15th, 2019, 1:37 pm

IanTHughes wrote:That is why I use the HYP Strategy which sorts out High Yielding shares with a growing dividend


Can you explain how this chooses Vodafone, particularly before a widely expected dividend cut? Presumably it would reject Compass despite its record of dividend increases.

Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6025
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1396 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221808

Postby Alaric » May 15th, 2019, 1:43 pm

Itsallaguess wrote: I have the view that if we're going to personally modify the HYP 'single-company' approach to drop down the yield list, then additional and valuable diversification benefits with very little lost in terms of yield can then actually be delivered via a broadly Investment Trust approach instead....


If you included ITs in the list sorted by dividend yield, their merits or otherwise would become apparent. Maintenance and increase of dividends is obtained through their accounting and operational rules.

ITs have always been around, is it the greater ability to research and self select that have highlighted them? Perhaps there's now greater control over discounts and premiums making them more comparable to OEICs.

CryptoPlankton
Lemon Slice
Posts: 786
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1543 times
Been thanked: 873 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221813

Postby CryptoPlankton » May 15th, 2019, 1:50 pm

dspp wrote:
CryptoPlankton wrote:It amazes me how this whole argument keeps staggering on round and round in circles. If, as is clearly the case, there are people who are content with their use of the HYP strategy then of course it works. Is it the very best long-term total return investment strategy? Almost certainly not - it isn't designed for that. But it generally appears to do what it says on the tin. It seems those that carefully read the tin are satisfied with that and those that don't seem to expect it to perform some function that it wasn't intended for. Horses for course and all that...


CP,

One of the problems is that some people are successfully pursuing a strategy that they call HYP. Let me call them "pragmatic-HYP" types. However it contains some ingredients that are not in the tin labelled "purist-HYP". This poses a dilemma, both for : those who are trying to understand the ?? HYP ?? thingymajig and assess whether it will meet their needs, and then to get on and do it; and also for those who moderate the HYP-P board and have to deal with the sectarian strife over this. And lastly there are some who pursued a strategy that they thought was called ?? HYP ??, but found it didn't work for them and are wondering what the missing ingredient was, or was it them that was error prone.

regards, dspp

Hi dspp

I don't want to get sucked into this particular black hole, especially as it's a beautiful afternoon here and I'm off for a game of golf shortly. However, I can see your point(s), particularly with regard to the running (I daren't use the "m" word!) of the HYP-P board. What I would say is that I am not aware of having seen the tin labelled "purist-HYP", this concept does seem to be a bit of a myth. Descriptions of the strategy that I have seen always include room for the individual's own input (notably when it comes to safety criteria when choosing shares) and really just describe a general method for setting up a portfolio. Although designed for fairly novice investors, anyone making investments in the stock market should be aware of the risks of loss (we are warned often enough by stockbrokers etc) and therefore take some responsibility for their own decisions. Having said that, if the "guidelines" aren't strayed from too far then I find it unlikely that medium term results would be anything much more than disappointing - certainly not catastrophic.

One thing that seems to be overlooked is that In a bear market (which we haven't seen for so long people seem to have forgotten that they happen) people investing for TR can be faced with awkward dilemmas deciding what to sell (possibly at a loss) in order to get their income. I believe that people with HYPs value not having to make such decisions, even if it means a (temporary, going by past evidence) dent in their income. A lot of sensible people make allowances for such prospects in the amount they draw and by having a reserve. "Not pure HYP" I hear you say? Well, as I said earlier, nothing is. That's what makes this debate fairly futile.

Anyway, curry night at the clubhouse...

Cheers, CP

Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6025
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1396 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221815

Postby Alaric » May 15th, 2019, 2:08 pm

CryptoPlankton wrote: What I would say is that I am not aware of having seen the tin labelled "purist-HYP", this concept does seem to be a bit of a myth.


This thread comes close by discussing the latest thoughts by the, or one of the originators

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=16868

The selection and notional purchase of Vodafone was particularly controversial given that a dividend cut was widely anticipated.

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8178
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 912 times
Been thanked: 4078 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221817

Postby tjh290633 » May 15th, 2019, 2:13 pm

Alaric wrote:
IanTHughes wrote:That is why I use the HYP Strategy which sorts out High Yielding shares with a growing dividend


Can you explain how this chooses Vodafone, particularly before a widely expected dividend cut? Presumably it would reject Compass despite its record of dividend increases.

The simple answer is that currently neither VOR or CPG currently qualify for an HYP. VOD because of the recent dividend reduction and CPG because of low yield, despite regular increases in dividend.

I am surprised that these simple facts are not apparent to you

This does not mean that someone, who already holds one or both, may not continue to hold them.

TJH

IanTHughes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1789
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 730 times
Been thanked: 1117 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221818

Postby IanTHughes » May 15th, 2019, 2:13 pm

Bouleversee wrote:
IanTHughes wrote:
Alaric wrote:If you want dividend growth, it would a better filter to add the dividend and growth rate together and sort on that. With that method, you don't reject performers such as Compass, Unilever etc. because their dividend performance has pushed the share price up and the initial dividend yield down.

So I was right. You would select a 3% yield with a growing dividend rather than a 7% yield, with a growing dividend. Further, you justify that decision based on your ability as a Fortune Teller!

Well, you must do what you believe is right, I will stick to the reality of the HYP Strategy.

Nothing to do with ability as a fortune teller so far as I am concerned, just bitter experience.

Your bitter experience, and I am truly sorry that you found it so bitter, is based on what has happened in the past. It tells you next to nothing about the future

Bouleversee wrote: I would certainly rather top up my Compass or my Greggs, WH Smith, James Fisher and various others which have given steady increases on comparatively modest dividends, accompanied by considerable capital growth, than VOD which is enough of risk to continue to hold in my view and not worth the risk of adding. The market today seems to confirm that view.

I was simply using VOD as an example of high yield to demonstrate how long it would take for a growing low yield to catch up both in the Annual and Total Accumulated Income of a High Yield with a held dividend.

I would not myself add VOD and nor will I be adding to my current holding until there is some evidence of the Progressive Dividend policy now claimed by the company directors. That means waiting until at least the next Interim and more likely the next Full Year results have been published.

Bouleversee wrote:Having been at this game for considerably longer than Ian H. can have been, experience has shown that the HYP approach has simply not worked for me since I was introduced to it, possibly because I haven't done any of the trimming and tinkering and possibly because I started following it at the wrong time.

Well I have been in Investment Banking for decades but only investing for my own benefit since being independent 18 years ago. But with the greatest of respect, that on its own, does not mean that my opinions and/or ideas are any less valid than anyone else's.

Again, I am sorry that HYP has not worked for you. All I can say is that is has and does work for me. And that is without any automated trimming and only minimal tinkering. I am somewhat more cavalier with regard to Market Capital and not as restrictive with Diversity but, essentially, I follow the strategy as originally laid of by Stephen Bland. However, I am quite ready to accept that starting my HYP in 2012 was a lucky timing break. Having said that, it is outperforming some of the IT alternatives. Not all I am sure, but enough to tell me I am doing something right.

Bouleversee wrote:It is the sustainability of the dividend that counts IMHO and the total return.

Well, in that case HYP is most definitely not for you. HYP looks for Dividend Growth, not simply sustainability. As well as that, it is an Income Strategy, aimed at creating a growing Income Stream, leaving the capital value to meander along wherever it will. Of course, if one succeeds in getting the Growing Income Stream, Capital Appreciation will occur, at some point. But remember, Total Return is not how one measures the success of HYP.

Bouleversee wrote:After all, one can always sell off some high performing shares if one needs a bigger income, which not everyone does to start with.

Of course you can. But consider this. Dividends fall, leading both to a lower income and a lower capital value. Are you seriously suggesting that selling at such a market low point would not cause further pain? Further, are you suggesting that selling chunks of capital is a good way of raising income? It surely follows that the dividend previously generated by the sold capital will no longer be available. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with selling per se. But I would not like to be in a position where I was forced to sell in order to pay the electricity bill!



Ian
Last edited by IanTHughes on May 15th, 2019, 2:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

dspp
Lemon Half
Posts: 5884
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 5825 times
Been thanked: 2127 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221819

Postby dspp » May 15th, 2019, 2:14 pm

CryptoPlankton wrote:
dspp wrote:
CryptoPlankton wrote:It amazes me how this whole argument keeps staggering on round and round in circles....


CP,

One of the problems is that some people are successfully pursuing a strategy that they call HYP. Let me call them "pragmatic-HYP" types. However it contains some ingredients that are not in the tin labelled "purist-HYP". This poses a dilemma, both for : those who are trying to understand the ?? HYP ?? thingymajig and assess whether it will meet their needs, and then to get on and do it; and also for those who moderate the HYP-P board and have to deal with the sectarian strife over this. And lastly there are some who pursued a strategy that they thought was called ?? HYP ??, but found it didn't work for them and are wondering what the missing ingredient was, or was it them that was error prone.

regards, dspp

Hi dspp

I don't want to get sucked into this particular black hole, especially as it's a beautiful afternoon here ...

Cheers, CP


CP,

I don't want to get sucked in either, which is why I very much prefer that the various HYP types thrash out things themselves viewtopic.php?f=31&t=17614&start=20#p221727 . Until they do that my expectation is that the circular strife will go on for another thirty years. That's even longer than Game Of Thrones if the reviews are to be believed !

regards, dspp

IanTHughes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1789
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 730 times
Been thanked: 1117 times

Re: Whether HYP (as defined in the guidelines) works

#221826

Postby IanTHughes » May 15th, 2019, 2:35 pm

Alaric wrote:
IanTHughes wrote:That is why I use the HYP Strategy which sorts out High Yielding shares with a growing dividend

Can you explain how this chooses Vodafone, particularly before a widely expected dividend cut?


I do like simple questions:

VOD was not selected by the HYP Strategy, but by me for my HYP. Furthermore, I did not select it in anticipation of a dividend cut but in the expectation that the dividend would not be cut. Just to make it crystal clear and simple for non-HYPers such as yourself to fully understand: selecting shares that you expect to suffer a cut in the dividend is not part of the HYP Strategy. Clear now?

Alaric wrote:Presumably it would reject Compass despite its record of dividend increases.

The dividend yield offered with a purchase of Compass Group (CPG) is currently too low for inclusion in HYP. The clue is in the name: "High Yield Portfolio" or HYP. Get it now?

I seriously thought you would have known those two answers already! Oh well, hopefully my above explanations are clear and simple enough for you to finally understand.


Ian


Return to “High Yield Shares & Strategies - General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests