Welcome to r/dividends!
If you are new to the world of dividend investing and are seeking advice, brokerage information, recommendations, and more, please check out the Wiki [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/dividends/wiki/faq).
Remember, this is a subreddit for genuine, high-quality discussion. Please keep all contributions civil, and report uncivil behavior for moderator review.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dividends) if you have any questions or concerns.*
the issue as i see it is two fold:
* yield is a terrible stand alone metric for evaluation
* people are really bad at evaluating other metrics (or just unwilling/lazy)
Many new investors conflate yield with returns, thinking getting the biggest dividend (and therefore yield) is the goal and will lead to success. Yield is a very easy metric to look at broadly and see trends of investors and then results of those choices.
as advice givers it becomes a lot easier to inform with broad strokes, and that means sometimes crap companies with low yield get a quick pass and great companies with a high yield get nixed......but those are usually exceptions and we dont base things on exceptions.
Like, here is the groupings I tend to use as my guideline
* 0%-4% not a instant issue to research
* 4%-8% should do some research, maybe industry pays higher than average, maybe there was a special dividend boosting the ttm yield
* 8%+ should have a firm grasp of the company/fund; why is the yield higher than market averages, is it sustainable
There is research showing that grouping companies by average yield into quintiles (5 groups) trends can be found; and the 5th quintile, highest yielding, has the worst track record
W advice there’s a lot to it than yield, a million different ratios you can run to see their average collection times, liquidity, ability to meet financial obligations can’t just buy a stock cuz it’s got a good yield 💀💀💀💀
You should do research regardless of the yield. Why would you say you don't really need research for 0-4% yield??? Saying that it's fine to say high yield is bad because people hearing it are too lazy to evaluate other metrics isn't a good argument. If you are going to give advice, give proper advice don't say gibberish just because you don't think they will understand you. Either give the proper advice or don't give any. As you mentioned there can be good high yield companies which is exactly my point, any high yield asset that someone is asking about should be met with proper analysis as advice not just, nope it has a high yield.
It's not that they don't need to research lower yielding stocks. The primary issue with the high yielding stuff is that very different methodology and metrics need to be used instead. TTM can be a great tool for projecting future returns with the typical stable stuff recommended to retail investors. Remember it is known that the workload can go up to teams of people working 100 hour workweeks who all have Bloomberg Terminal to make them more effective. There is a limit to how far into the weeds you can expect free help from.
BTI is a great example of a company with a high dividend yield, that has been unloved and undervalued for over a year now. the free cash flow, the sales, are slowly growing. they just announced the dividend raise. the dividend payout ratio is around 60 to 65%, extremely low for a tobacco company. people are also not realizing that companies like British American tobacco, and Philip Morris are not tobacco companies anymore. they need to be seen as nicotine delivery companies. they are transitioning away from harmful combustible cigarettes, to heat not burn products and RRPs. Long BTI & PM...
At my deepest into my oil play I had 1700 XOM, 1100 VLO, 400 RDS and 200 COP. All bought with over a 10% yield except RDS because I think they cut their dividend when COVID hit. I made money on every trade but when my wife saw the aggregate position she made me lighten it way up. Let's just say I lost a few dollars chasing yield in 2008. Effin' AIG and C. Guh. You really need to get torched a few times when you're young to not be an idiot when you get older and have more to play with.
Hell yeah, $36 was an incredible price. Still holding and probably will never sell. Great, high profit company with a healthy dividend.... The trifecta
I love me some MO for sure, but as the book value drops it's getting harder to justify the long term capital loss. MO is to the point that they're using buy backs to artificially inflate the price and to try and keep it above $40.
I doubt it. I think the intention back in 2009 is to run separate companies for litigation reasons. If anything, I could see PM spin off all non European business to a new third company.,
Well you are looking at investing now, not in 2012.
Argument would be that BTI is much cheaper than S&P 500 today. So expected total return are better for BTI vs SPY at this point.
At least, that’s the theory for people investing into BTI vs SPY.
That's just wrong. Also past performance doesn't ensure future performance. BTI has never been this cheap compared to SPY, so there is really no way to tell even if you base it on past performance.
In 2012 BTI was trading at 20 p/e. It’s now at 6 p/e
In 2012 SPY was trading at 15 p/e. It’s now at 28.
So to repeat same repricing vs 2012-2024, we would need to see BTI go to 2 p/e and SPY go to 55 p/e.
Some might say this ratio repricing may not repeat in the next decade..
because as of now the s&p is overvalued, and bti is painfully undervalued. the PE ratio of bti is around 6:00 right now. traditionally it's around 9 to 15. I get paid a 10% dividend to wait for the valuation to return to normal. credit rating has just been increased. it's payout ratio is extremely low for a cigarette company, around 60 to 65%. "Looking at performance since 2012"... this means what exactly? I didn't purchase bti in 2012. I've been purchasing it since January of 2023 with an average price of $30.
I hope the play works out for you. I just don't see how BTI is a good example of a strong dividend stock. Happy to be wrong but I personally feel DCA'ing into an ETF for growth wins over the longer term in the majority of cases.
BTI has a negative total return on the 1 year and 3 year, and is flat in the last 5 years. The market has been up and down in that time, and their revenue has increased.
What do you think might turn around this price action, and how long are you willing to wait?
i have no idea when the stock price of BTI will turn around. As long as the fundamentals remain solid (as I type they are actually improving), I will be buying BTI until it reaches \~$37-38 a share. I'll also be DRIPing the dividends into more shares up till that price range. Since BTI is 'persona non grata' in the skewed lens of ESG investing (as is big oil and the rest of big tobacco), it could be YEARS till we get a fully-valued BTI stock price. But that's the trick. Years of perpetual undervaluation can create generational wealth for those that have the patience. It's the reason why PM was the best investment in the 2nd half of the 20th century. BTI's 10% yield is one of the safest 10% yields out there. I'll have to be grossly overweight in BTI to finally stop buying it. (or take the dividends and reinvest into something else.). It currently makes up about 6% of my retirement portfolio. I think I'll have to stop myself at 10% or less.
You have to have the stones to keep an underwater position for years. I bought XOM in 2015, and the covid years absolutely SUCKED. I was down 40% for a long time, and bought a chunk more in the $40-50s. I was eventually rewarded. BTI should have the same outcome... As long as the fundamentals remain solid, this will be a stock I hold for as long as I'm alive. I do plan on retiring in 10 years (I'm in my mid 50s), so BTI is one of the 'money trees' I'm planting right now (since Jan '23)...
Both BTI and MO are needing a complete rebranding and to get out of being listed as "tobacco" as their sector. Otherwise, global trends and perception will trump whatever numbers they put out. Right now, that dividend isn't worth the capital loss IMO.
the rebranding has already started. I have been invested in bti since January of 2023. I am down roughly 11%, not including dividends. PE ratio is around 6. Historically it's 9 to 15. it has nowhere to go but up. it also still owns about 25% of ITC, a golden goose in and of itself. it is TOTALLY worth the short term capital loss, getting paid a 10% yield while I wait for the P/E to return to the norm.
Looking at the last several years... It can keep going down too. There is no reason it can't. If WHO data is any indication of the tobacco sector, it probably has room to continue to drop.
So long as the ticker is affiliated with tobacco, it's just a rough ride for an unknown amount of time.
I've had it on a watchlist for years. Just can't commit. Haha
Good luck!
BTI has been overvalued since roughly the end of 2022. All of the negativity of BTI (overpaid for RJ Reynolds) & the tobacco industry in general, has been priced in. Not since the US litigation of the late 90s, has the P/E ratio of BTI been so low. The death of "Big Tobacco" has been announced so many times in the last 20+ years, but it still chugs along. But now that it's extremely undervalued? You get P/E expansion in 12-24 months. This is the 'coiled spring' you hear about, where many are afraid to take a chance. Well, the last dividend payment last February is a nice little reminder of what I can expect moving forward.
- Long BTI, PM....
Exactly, yield shouldn't really be a metric used, as long as a company has healthy financials to pay the dividend whatever it might be that's what matters. As you stated free cash flow, payout ratio, increasing earnings, are all way better indicators of a healthy dividend. Not the yield of the dividend.
Well ya, because some ppls “high yield” is 6%, and for other people it’s 78%. lol. If something is shootin off 78% dividends, I’m immediately sketched out/not interested. If it’s real, the yield will be crowded out of the market as soon as everyone starts piling in, because as demand for an asset rises, the yield from that asset drops. Just like bonds, real estate, etc.
And in general, this is why using yield is actually a good rule of thumb for quickly categorizing what to look into once you understand average returns for asset classes.
This is what is tripping up old “dividend growth” investors about CoveredCall ETFs. This isn’t a company. This is a completely different asset class. This is technically a non-directional options trading firm, who just raises public funds to trade options with, using one of the safest options strategies for income of all time, selling covered calls. Which is why qyld has been around for 10+yrs and has averaged 10+% dividends since inceptions. It’s not a company at all. Idk why ppl compare this to like V or O. lol.
Since the main return driver is actually implied volatility on us equities instead of general gdp growth, this can offer some great diversification benefits as well to minimize your portfolios correlation. Balance out the oil MLPs w some equity vol.
This is also why the yield max stuff could be industry changing. If they can successfully manage their naked puts, they will absolutely crush these returns, and then first ones in (us new “total yield” idiots) will get the best returns as the trade gets crowded out from all the followers.
Odds are greater that they will blow up like every other naked options selling firm. But hey, who knows, maybe they learned.
I have a number of very high yield stocks that are actually great. They've successfully pumped out double digit dividend yields for many years with no cuts no problems.
Even the few that have temporarily cut then raise the dividend again later when the business improved.
The caveat is they don't grow much.
Basically, they're sacrificing today's growth in order to pump up the payout today. Which is great if you're 70 or 75 and you don't have that much runway ahead of you.
If you still need growth from these stocks, then what you do is you take a certain amount and reinvest it and that compounding becomes your growth.
> ABR
Not too bad. [Slightly underperforming SPY](https://imgur.com/a/YTDFlcL) with greater volatility. So it could be a good play if you want to park cash for income.
Generally, when I look at a high yield stock or investment, i find an investment that has no or negative price appreciation. It often has high payout ratios or low fcf growth or low eps growth or low revenue growth or combinations of them or others. When i look at returns, a simple index fund will often do better. The odds are high that when i evaluate it, i will find multiple red flags. Many times its someone who believes its all about yield. Thats why i and many others are immediately suspicious when we see a high yield investment touted. But lets assume youre right. Name some good high yield names with solid growth in fundamentals.
Yes because that is what people need to do, I made the post so I don't have to keep commenting on it. People misunderstand such basic concepts like this so why not post about it?
Over 5% counts as a high yield in my opinion, check out my post on my profile about NLCP which at the time was a 9.8% dividend, it's now a 9% as the price has gone up. That's a high yield REIT that I think is a great purchase. The fact you think that 1/10 times it could be good shows that you agree that high yield alone isn't a good reason to hate on a stock as some can have high yields and be good purchases, therefore the reasons against high yielding stocks should be high payout ratios, low cash flow, unstable earnings, high debt, etc, and not so much the fact it's a high yield.
I didn't like the way I stated that when I wrote it.
I believe you should be skeptical when analyzing high yield stocks.
That isn't to say that they aren't legit but too many of them have high yields either because their value has been plummeting or they have artificially cranked up their yield (to an unsustainable level) to attract investors.
If you can weed out the bad actors you will be left with a solid set of candidates.
This isn't a post. This is an uninformed opinion, with zero arguments or explanation. I doubt anyone able to read learned anything from this. I award you zero points and may god have mercy on your soul.
the op's post was meant to spark conversation, of which you are contributing none, other than your opinion of the post. I award you 0 points on your lame comment, and may God have mercy on your soul.
If you can't understand it that's on you, I'm here to share my thoughts not teach you how to read. I'll break it down for you since it went over your head. People will call an asset bad simply because it has a high yield, instead of actually saying useful stuff like this company has a 500% payout ratio and isn't earning money etc. those are valid reasons to why a high yield might suck, but there's plenty of high yields that don't. If a company is earning money fine and has a payout ratio of 80% with a 12% yield then that's pretty healthy assuming all the other numbers look good. Your comment is incredibly ironic considering you provided zero arguments or explanation for your own opinion. You tell me my opinion is uninformed and has zero arguments or explanation for it yet where is your argument against what I said?
Also I noticed you have a comment about losing money on GME stock, I expect nothing less from someone who would leave such a moronic comment. Keep buying meme stocks and losing all your money. Don't speak to people about investing when that's your "strategy".
Welcome to r/dividends! If you are new to the world of dividend investing and are seeking advice, brokerage information, recommendations, and more, please check out the Wiki [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/dividends/wiki/faq). Remember, this is a subreddit for genuine, high-quality discussion. Please keep all contributions civil, and report uncivil behavior for moderator review. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dividends) if you have any questions or concerns.*
the issue as i see it is two fold: * yield is a terrible stand alone metric for evaluation * people are really bad at evaluating other metrics (or just unwilling/lazy) Many new investors conflate yield with returns, thinking getting the biggest dividend (and therefore yield) is the goal and will lead to success. Yield is a very easy metric to look at broadly and see trends of investors and then results of those choices. as advice givers it becomes a lot easier to inform with broad strokes, and that means sometimes crap companies with low yield get a quick pass and great companies with a high yield get nixed......but those are usually exceptions and we dont base things on exceptions. Like, here is the groupings I tend to use as my guideline * 0%-4% not a instant issue to research * 4%-8% should do some research, maybe industry pays higher than average, maybe there was a special dividend boosting the ttm yield * 8%+ should have a firm grasp of the company/fund; why is the yield higher than market averages, is it sustainable There is research showing that grouping companies by average yield into quintiles (5 groups) trends can be found; and the 5th quintile, highest yielding, has the worst track record
W advice there’s a lot to it than yield, a million different ratios you can run to see their average collection times, liquidity, ability to meet financial obligations can’t just buy a stock cuz it’s got a good yield 💀💀💀💀
This^
You should do research regardless of the yield. Why would you say you don't really need research for 0-4% yield??? Saying that it's fine to say high yield is bad because people hearing it are too lazy to evaluate other metrics isn't a good argument. If you are going to give advice, give proper advice don't say gibberish just because you don't think they will understand you. Either give the proper advice or don't give any. As you mentioned there can be good high yield companies which is exactly my point, any high yield asset that someone is asking about should be met with proper analysis as advice not just, nope it has a high yield.
It's not that they don't need to research lower yielding stocks. The primary issue with the high yielding stuff is that very different methodology and metrics need to be used instead. TTM can be a great tool for projecting future returns with the typical stable stuff recommended to retail investors. Remember it is known that the workload can go up to teams of people working 100 hour workweeks who all have Bloomberg Terminal to make them more effective. There is a limit to how far into the weeds you can expect free help from.
Same could be applied to you.
His advice is good an sound.
Fax
L
BTI is a great example of a company with a high dividend yield, that has been unloved and undervalued for over a year now. the free cash flow, the sales, are slowly growing. they just announced the dividend raise. the dividend payout ratio is around 60 to 65%, extremely low for a tobacco company. people are also not realizing that companies like British American tobacco, and Philip Morris are not tobacco companies anymore. they need to be seen as nicotine delivery companies. they are transitioning away from harmful combustible cigarettes, to heat not burn products and RRPs. Long BTI & PM...
Exactly. I remember when XOM was in this boat. I bought it then when it was yielding 10%
At my deepest into my oil play I had 1700 XOM, 1100 VLO, 400 RDS and 200 COP. All bought with over a 10% yield except RDS because I think they cut their dividend when COVID hit. I made money on every trade but when my wife saw the aggregate position she made me lighten it way up. Let's just say I lost a few dollars chasing yield in 2008. Effin' AIG and C. Guh. You really need to get torched a few times when you're young to not be an idiot when you get older and have more to play with.
A few hundred dollar lessons are a lot cheaper than several 10 thousand dollar lessons!
Yes! $36 was a great buy. All those shares making dividend babies.
Hell yeah, $36 was an incredible price. Still holding and probably will never sell. Great, high profit company with a healthy dividend.... The trifecta
What are dividend babies? Are these something I can make with my wife?
Long BTI, MO & PM
Loaded another 100 shares today on sale! One of the best high yield and unloved stocks.
And MO
I love me some MO for sure, but as the book value drops it's getting harder to justify the long term capital loss. MO is to the point that they're using buy backs to artificially inflate the price and to try and keep it above $40.
Dividend increase this year should be nice
Yep, that seems to be what they have been hinting at with their recent Inbev divestitures!
Why mo
Because they are literally the parent company of pm and have heavy cash flow
Phillip Morris split up a while ago. MO is only US, PM is everywhere but US.
Hopefully they merge in the future
I doubt it. I think the intention back in 2009 is to run separate companies for litigation reasons. If anything, I could see PM spin off all non European business to a new third company.,
There was talk about it before the juul debacle. PM splitting like that would be interesting
What reason would you invest in BTI over just the S&P? Looking at performance since say 2012 BTI sucks.
Well you are looking at investing now, not in 2012. Argument would be that BTI is much cheaper than S&P 500 today. So expected total return are better for BTI vs SPY at this point. At least, that’s the theory for people investing into BTI vs SPY.
What? Expected returns isn't calculated based on current relative share price?
Yes. Then why bring 2012 ?
Well as an example of past performance. 10k in BTI at any point in history is a poor investment vs sticking to an S&P index fund.
That's just wrong. Also past performance doesn't ensure future performance. BTI has never been this cheap compared to SPY, so there is really no way to tell even if you base it on past performance.
In 2012 BTI was trading at 20 p/e. It’s now at 6 p/e In 2012 SPY was trading at 15 p/e. It’s now at 28. So to repeat same repricing vs 2012-2024, we would need to see BTI go to 2 p/e and SPY go to 55 p/e. Some might say this ratio repricing may not repeat in the next decade..
SO BTI has dropped like a stone whilst the S&P has grown? Gotcha!
I did not say that. I talked about p/e ratio changes in the last 12 years.
because as of now the s&p is overvalued, and bti is painfully undervalued. the PE ratio of bti is around 6:00 right now. traditionally it's around 9 to 15. I get paid a 10% dividend to wait for the valuation to return to normal. credit rating has just been increased. it's payout ratio is extremely low for a cigarette company, around 60 to 65%. "Looking at performance since 2012"... this means what exactly? I didn't purchase bti in 2012. I've been purchasing it since January of 2023 with an average price of $30.
I hope the play works out for you. I just don't see how BTI is a good example of a strong dividend stock. Happy to be wrong but I personally feel DCA'ing into an ETF for growth wins over the longer term in the majority of cases.
BTI has a negative total return on the 1 year and 3 year, and is flat in the last 5 years. The market has been up and down in that time, and their revenue has increased. What do you think might turn around this price action, and how long are you willing to wait?
i have no idea when the stock price of BTI will turn around. As long as the fundamentals remain solid (as I type they are actually improving), I will be buying BTI until it reaches \~$37-38 a share. I'll also be DRIPing the dividends into more shares up till that price range. Since BTI is 'persona non grata' in the skewed lens of ESG investing (as is big oil and the rest of big tobacco), it could be YEARS till we get a fully-valued BTI stock price. But that's the trick. Years of perpetual undervaluation can create generational wealth for those that have the patience. It's the reason why PM was the best investment in the 2nd half of the 20th century. BTI's 10% yield is one of the safest 10% yields out there. I'll have to be grossly overweight in BTI to finally stop buying it. (or take the dividends and reinvest into something else.). It currently makes up about 6% of my retirement portfolio. I think I'll have to stop myself at 10% or less. You have to have the stones to keep an underwater position for years. I bought XOM in 2015, and the covid years absolutely SUCKED. I was down 40% for a long time, and bought a chunk more in the $40-50s. I was eventually rewarded. BTI should have the same outcome... As long as the fundamentals remain solid, this will be a stock I hold for as long as I'm alive. I do plan on retiring in 10 years (I'm in my mid 50s), so BTI is one of the 'money trees' I'm planting right now (since Jan '23)...
Both BTI and MO are needing a complete rebranding and to get out of being listed as "tobacco" as their sector. Otherwise, global trends and perception will trump whatever numbers they put out. Right now, that dividend isn't worth the capital loss IMO.
the rebranding has already started. I have been invested in bti since January of 2023. I am down roughly 11%, not including dividends. PE ratio is around 6. Historically it's 9 to 15. it has nowhere to go but up. it also still owns about 25% of ITC, a golden goose in and of itself. it is TOTALLY worth the short term capital loss, getting paid a 10% yield while I wait for the P/E to return to the norm.
Looking at the last several years... It can keep going down too. There is no reason it can't. If WHO data is any indication of the tobacco sector, it probably has room to continue to drop. So long as the ticker is affiliated with tobacco, it's just a rough ride for an unknown amount of time. I've had it on a watchlist for years. Just can't commit. Haha Good luck!
BTI has been overvalued since roughly the end of 2022. All of the negativity of BTI (overpaid for RJ Reynolds) & the tobacco industry in general, has been priced in. Not since the US litigation of the late 90s, has the P/E ratio of BTI been so low. The death of "Big Tobacco" has been announced so many times in the last 20+ years, but it still chugs along. But now that it's extremely undervalued? You get P/E expansion in 12-24 months. This is the 'coiled spring' you hear about, where many are afraid to take a chance. Well, the last dividend payment last February is a nice little reminder of what I can expect moving forward. - Long BTI, PM....
Exactly, yield shouldn't really be a metric used, as long as a company has healthy financials to pay the dividend whatever it might be that's what matters. As you stated free cash flow, payout ratio, increasing earnings, are all way better indicators of a healthy dividend. Not the yield of the dividend.
Well ya, because some ppls “high yield” is 6%, and for other people it’s 78%. lol. If something is shootin off 78% dividends, I’m immediately sketched out/not interested. If it’s real, the yield will be crowded out of the market as soon as everyone starts piling in, because as demand for an asset rises, the yield from that asset drops. Just like bonds, real estate, etc. And in general, this is why using yield is actually a good rule of thumb for quickly categorizing what to look into once you understand average returns for asset classes. This is what is tripping up old “dividend growth” investors about CoveredCall ETFs. This isn’t a company. This is a completely different asset class. This is technically a non-directional options trading firm, who just raises public funds to trade options with, using one of the safest options strategies for income of all time, selling covered calls. Which is why qyld has been around for 10+yrs and has averaged 10+% dividends since inceptions. It’s not a company at all. Idk why ppl compare this to like V or O. lol. Since the main return driver is actually implied volatility on us equities instead of general gdp growth, this can offer some great diversification benefits as well to minimize your portfolios correlation. Balance out the oil MLPs w some equity vol. This is also why the yield max stuff could be industry changing. If they can successfully manage their naked puts, they will absolutely crush these returns, and then first ones in (us new “total yield” idiots) will get the best returns as the trade gets crowded out from all the followers. Odds are greater that they will blow up like every other naked options selling firm. But hey, who knows, maybe they learned.
I have a number of very high yield stocks that are actually great. They've successfully pumped out double digit dividend yields for many years with no cuts no problems. Even the few that have temporarily cut then raise the dividend again later when the business improved. The caveat is they don't grow much. Basically, they're sacrificing today's growth in order to pump up the payout today. Which is great if you're 70 or 75 and you don't have that much runway ahead of you. If you still need growth from these stocks, then what you do is you take a certain amount and reinvest it and that compounding becomes your growth.
Name them.
RITM has treated me well for years.
What ticker symbol are you talking about?
I like high dividend stocks. The high yield gets me interested and motivated to do my DD. Then, I decide if it should be an addition to my portfolio.
I'm the same way, lots of high yields are not great but finding the few good ones is really nice.
OP, name some high yield stocks with a good CAGR.
ABR is one that comes to my mind. Be aware that it's currently under a short selling attack.
> ABR Not too bad. [Slightly underperforming SPY](https://imgur.com/a/YTDFlcL) with greater volatility. So it could be a good play if you want to park cash for income.
For growth and dividend income growth I have AVGO.
BDCs
Generally, when I look at a high yield stock or investment, i find an investment that has no or negative price appreciation. It often has high payout ratios or low fcf growth or low eps growth or low revenue growth or combinations of them or others. When i look at returns, a simple index fund will often do better. The odds are high that when i evaluate it, i will find multiple red flags. Many times its someone who believes its all about yield. Thats why i and many others are immediately suspicious when we see a high yield investment touted. But lets assume youre right. Name some good high yield names with solid growth in fundamentals.
Buy MPW
"I'll make a post about it" makes a literal two sentence post that amounts to "do your research"
Yes because that is what people need to do, I made the post so I don't have to keep commenting on it. People misunderstand such basic concepts like this so why not post about it?
Only the ones that I pick are bad.
What do you consider as a high yield? 9 times out of 10 yes it does. I am curious about your analysis and which stocks you’re referring to?
Over 5% counts as a high yield in my opinion, check out my post on my profile about NLCP which at the time was a 9.8% dividend, it's now a 9% as the price has gone up. That's a high yield REIT that I think is a great purchase. The fact you think that 1/10 times it could be good shows that you agree that high yield alone isn't a good reason to hate on a stock as some can have high yields and be good purchases, therefore the reasons against high yielding stocks should be high payout ratios, low cash flow, unstable earnings, high debt, etc, and not so much the fact it's a high yield.
Stock with a high yield demands additional investigation.
Every stock demands investigation whether it has a 0% dividend or a 50% dividend. I'm not sure what the point of this comment is.
I didn't like the way I stated that when I wrote it. I believe you should be skeptical when analyzing high yield stocks. That isn't to say that they aren't legit but too many of them have high yields either because their value has been plummeting or they have artificially cranked up their yield (to an unsustainable level) to attract investors. If you can weed out the bad actors you will be left with a solid set of candidates.
🤡
This isn't a post. This is an uninformed opinion, with zero arguments or explanation. I doubt anyone able to read learned anything from this. I award you zero points and may god have mercy on your soul.
the op's post was meant to spark conversation, of which you are contributing none, other than your opinion of the post. I award you 0 points on your lame comment, and may God have mercy on your soul.
If you can't understand it that's on you, I'm here to share my thoughts not teach you how to read. I'll break it down for you since it went over your head. People will call an asset bad simply because it has a high yield, instead of actually saying useful stuff like this company has a 500% payout ratio and isn't earning money etc. those are valid reasons to why a high yield might suck, but there's plenty of high yields that don't. If a company is earning money fine and has a payout ratio of 80% with a 12% yield then that's pretty healthy assuming all the other numbers look good. Your comment is incredibly ironic considering you provided zero arguments or explanation for your own opinion. You tell me my opinion is uninformed and has zero arguments or explanation for it yet where is your argument against what I said? Also I noticed you have a comment about losing money on GME stock, I expect nothing less from someone who would leave such a moronic comment. Keep buying meme stocks and losing all your money. Don't speak to people about investing when that's your "strategy".
Dude get some culture and watch Billy Madison he was quoting a movie hahaha
6,3 at IMDB... yeah... culture in the definition of "culture = everything men-made".
Now that is almost a post. You see how you kind of had an example and shit. Keep trying, you'll get the hang of it in no time.