For the first 30 or so years of working, saving and investing, you’ll be first in the mode of getting out of the hole (paying down debt), and then building your net worth (that’s wealth accumulation.). But don’t forget, wealth accumulation isn’t the ultimate goal. Decumulation is! (a separate category here at the Hub).
Well, readers of this site will know I’m a big fan of companies that reward shareholders with dividends.
And why not love dividends?
Although I use a few indexed products in my investment portfolio, for extra diversification just in case, getting paid on a consistent, growing basis from Canadian and U.S. stocks: that’s a beautiful thing. I got another raise this week that I’ll link to below!
Digging deeper, I’m not that worried about the markets or inflation right now. There is a reason why dividends matter to me. Why do dividends really matter?
Beyond the Canadian dividend tax credit, beyond consistent payments and ever growing income I’ve experienced to date, dividends help me stick to my plan.
There is no financial advisor in my plan, nor fees paid to any advisor in my plan.
There is no day trading, there are no wasted fees or losses for trading.
There is no wild market speculation, I’m not trying to time anything.
I focus on my savings rate for investing and I invest more money when I have it. It’s that simple.
Recall that dividends paid is real money paid from real company profits. Buying and holding an established company that has paid dividends for decades is a good sign (at least from a historical perspective) that this company had enough cashflow to reward shareholders and stay in business.
Companies that don’t pay dividends tend to use their money for other means, grow their business; make acquisitions or buy back shares, pay down risky debt, therefore driving the stock price higher over time.
These are not poor management decisions by any means: far from it. There are lots of ways shareholder value is created and to be honest, acquisitions, share buybacks and other company reinvestments could be better company decisions in the long-run!!
When it comes to the capital gains versus dividend income debate, there really isn’t a debate to be had, since every dollar you earn in capital gains from a stock is worth just as much as your dividend dollar paid. I love the graphic shown at the top of this blog.
Dividends from established companies however are paid consistently, and dividend payments might even rise over time by some, so this level of predictability can provide some financial security especially when you’re invested in a diverse portfolio of stocks.
Unlike the first half of 2022, the financial position of most defined benefit (DB) pension plans “decreased slightly” in the third quarter, as they were buffeted by inflation and volatile stock markets. Investment returns were mostly negative in the quarter, and yields on long-term bonds were lower at the end of the quarter than they were at the beginning, according to The Mercer Pension Health Pulse (MPHP), released on Monday.
The MPHP tracks the median solvency ratio of the DB pension plans in Mercer’s pension database, which decreased from 109% as at June 30, 2022, to 108% as at September 30, 2022.
Of the plans in Mercer’s pension database, at the end of Q3:
72% of plans were estimated to be in a surplus position on a solvency basis,(vs. 73% at the end of Q2)
17% of plans were estimated to have solvency ratios between 90% and 100%,(vs. 16% at the end of Q2)
5% have solvency ratios between 80% and 90% (unchanged from Q2), and
6% have solvency ratios less than 80%. (also unchanged from Q2).
In a press release, the Calgary-based Principal and leader of Mercer’s Wealth business, Ben Ukonga, said that “In spite of the significant market volatility, the financial health of most DB plans would have experienced only a slight decline in the third quarter of 2022. As for what can be expected for the remainder of the year, plan sponsors should continue to expect significant volatility.”
Mercer says experts “urge caution and encourage plan sponsors to be prepared for anything, with more volatility on the horizon. Markets will most likely remain volatile in the short to medium term due to numerous risks such as the continued war in Ukraine, the upcoming US midterm elections, the potential confrontation between the US and China over the status of Taiwan, risks of a global energy supply shortfall, and of course, the ongoing inflationary environment.”
Continued short- and medium- term volatility
Markets will most likely continue to remain volatile in the short to medium term due to numerous global risks, including the war in Ukraine (and the Russian Government’s actions in response to Ukraine’s recent successes on the battlefront, such as the recent annexation of parts of Ukraine in violation of International Law, and the geo-political fallouts from these actions). Mercer is also cautious about the upcoming US mid-term elections, the increasing political gridlock and polarization in the US, and the potential for a confrontation between the US and China over the status of Taiwan. The recent volatility in the UK currency and bond markets and the risk of contagion to other markets.
Mercer also sees risks from a global energy supply shortfall, and the effect such a shortfall would have on the global economy: “… plan sponsors should pay attention to the risks associated with energy insecurity in Europe – such as the risk of the Russian Government using Russian gas supplies against Europe in retaliation to sanctions on Russia, and the effects on European economies if their energy supplies are curtailed.”
Inflation at levels not seen in 30 years
With inflation running at levels not seen in over 30 years, central banks globally are “on an aggressive monetary tightening mission in order to get inflation under control. Will they succeed without triggering a hard-landing global recession? Will higher interest rates make governments, corporations and households unable to meet the interest payments on debts they accumulated during the very long period of low interest rates? This could lead to an increase in bankruptcies and crowding out spending and investments, further exacerbating the risks of a hard landing global recession.”
As workers see a decline in the purchasing power of their wages, there will be increased pressures on employers for higher wages, Mercer says. “Sponsors of indexed DB plans will see increases in the cost of these arrangements, and sponsors of non-indexed DB plans may face pressure from their pensioner groups to provide ad hoc cost of living adjustments. Coupled with labour shortages, some employers may have no choice but to increase their labour costs. And companies that are unable to pass these increased costs to their customers will face profit margin pressures and reduced profitability, hurting their future economic outlook.”
Covid still poses macro risk
The global health landscape also poses a macro risk, Mercer says. “As the western hemisphere is entering the winter months, will a new vaccine-resistant strain of the COVID-19 virus appear? And how will governments and citizens deal with such a resurgence? Will the Chinese government continue with its zero-COVID policy? And how much of a negative impact will this policy, along with what some would call draconian lock down measures, have on the Chinese economy? And how deep will the negative knock-on effects be on China’s trading partners?” Continue Reading…
The IPO or “Initial Public Offerings” market — more commonly known as the new issues market — has gone through an extraordinarily bad time this year. It’s been bad for all three of the groups that take part in this market. They are as follows:
Investors who put their money in new issues have lost substantial sums in the past year. On average, new stock issues tend to do worse than the rest of the market in their first few years of public trading. This past year, they performed much worse than ever.
Financial institutions that bring new issues to market for sale to investors have suffered, too, because demand for new issues has dried up. At this time of year in 2021, the new issues market had raised around $100 billion. So far this year, it has raised just $5 billion. In the past quarter century, the new issues market raised an average of $33 billion at this point in the year.
Companies that raise capital for themselves through the new issues market are suffering as well. When the new issues market began drying up as a source of corporate funding, many would-be issuers of new stocks found it was harder and more expensive than ever to find alternate sources of financing.
This will be worst year for IPOs since 2009
This will be the worst year for raising money in the new issues market since 2009, when the economy was struggling to pull out of the 2008/2009 recession.
As long-time readers know, we generally advise staying out of new stock issues. After all, there’s a random element in the success or failure of every business, especially when it’s just starting out. But new issues expose you to a special risk that you avoid with stocks that have been trading publicly for some time. That is, you can only invest in new issues when they come to market.
This is just one more example of a conflict of interest, which we’ve often referred to as the worst source of risk you face as an investor.
Companies only come to the new issue market to sell their stock when it’s a good time for the company and/or its insiders to sell. The insiders can’t predict the future, of course. However, they do know much more than outsiders do about their company. Continue Reading…
Indexed investing, when done properly can be an efficient and low-cost way of gaining exposure to various markets. Investment vehicles such as exchange-traded funds (ETFs), make it possible for individuals to invest in these indexes, i.e., the Nasdaq-100 index.
Nasdaq-100 & Exposures
Launched in 1985, the Nasdaq-100 is one of the world’s most well-known large-cap growth indexes. The companies in the Nasdaq-100 include over 100 of the largest domestic and international non-financial companies listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market based on market capitalization. It is mainly comprised of technology, consumer, and health companies – with a slight exposure to industrials and telecom.
When looking at what is powering economic growth in the 21st century, we look to those new economy sectors that are highly digital. These are disproportionately tech or consumer companies like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google. This index gives you exposure to the biggest Nasdaq-listed names, along with others that follow closely behind these leaders in technology.
Nasdaq-100 vs S&P 500 Volatility & Performance
When looking at volatility, one may think of the Nasdaq as being a more growth-oriented index, and if looking at returns alone, these have certainly shown to be significant over the years. Investors may assume that the indexes’ higher performance leads to higher volatility compared to other leading indexes. However, if we take a look at the chart below, which is more of a longer-term picture, you are getting a pretty significant consistent volatility range. Of course, if you look at this year in comparison inflation has been at the forefront of headlines, growth-oriented companies have been taking a harder hit than more cash-up-front companies: you see more volatility in the Nasdaq this year vs the S&P 500.
Both the Nasdaq-100 and the S&P 500 have had very similar volatility over last 15+ years
Index returns do not reflect transactions costs or the deduction of other fees and expenses and it is not possible to invest directly in an Index. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
The big story for everyone is the performance of the Nasdaq-100 vs. the S&P 500. The long-term performance of the Nasdaq-100 shows an upward trend. If we look at post-2008, generally monetary policy had been very supportive of market growth, and companies had been able to invest in research, helping them grow over time. You see this reflected in the Nasdaq-100, where thanks to the underlying companies in this index, there is outperformance. The chart below showcases this quite well. It tells us that the Nasdaq-100 is a valuable holding in a portfolio based on performance.
Index returns do not reflect transactions costs or the deduction of other fees and expenses and it is not possible to invest directly in an Index. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Market Considerations: Performance vs Interest Rates
The chart below shows what happened the last time rates went up by a similar amount. You can see a gradual stairway up from almost 0% to about 2.5%. You can see the dip in the NDX price (grey line), which looks like a blip, almost not noticeable (but it was 23%). This isn’t very far from the drawdown this year to date. Albeit the Fed is raising rates much faster.
Based on experience, the Fed may keep rates high until inflation gets under control into that sort of two to three per cent range. The question for investors is, what happens to stocks if rates get to 3%, 4% or maybe 5% and perhaps stay at that level for a few years? This is where it is imperative to look at the amount of debt these companies have on their balance sheet, how much the interest costs will go up and what their earnings power looks like. Will they be able to remain competitive with the price of everything rising? Will consumers continue to pay for these products vs. downsizing or even substituting for cheaper alternatives? Continue Reading…
By Kim Catechis, Investment Strategist, Franklin Templeton Institute
and Andrew Buntain, Institutional Portfolio Manager,
Franklin Bissett Investment Management
(Sponsor Content)
The world is living in volatile times.
East-West geopolitical tensions, which had been building even before the COVID-19 pandemic upended the lives of millions around the globe, have exploded into war in Europe. The Russia/Ukraine conflict is now well into its sixth month, with no end in sight. Severe sanctions disconnecting Russia from the West are structural and unlikely to be removed even after the conflict is resolved.
There are real consequences for the world from this conflict. Ukraine’s economy has been ravaged. Europe is back to having a militarized border. NATO has grown stronger and is spending on defence; more than 2% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is expected to be allocated to military expenses by member nations. Supply chain disruptions have been exacerbated by the upheaval, with an energy crisis in Europe, fears of famine in Africa, shortages of critical products in many industries and the highest inflation levels in over 40 years.
Growth expectations are falling on the growing realization that central banks are not well placed to deal with food price and energy inflation, despite aggressive policy rate hikes. In many countries, including Canada, fears of recession have replaced fears of overheated economies.
Higher commodity prices a boon for producer nations
Prices for the world’s basic commodities — energy, food, metals and minerals, forest products — soared in the first half of the year. In recent months, they have fallen somewhat but remain high, and this situation is likely to continue. Trade patterns in place for 49 years have been destroyed, and new alliances and infrastructure take time to build. As with any change, there will be winners and losers. For commodity producers like Canada, the evolving dynamics open doors to new opportunities.
Energy hits critical mass
Europe has gone on a buyers’ strike against Russia. In response, Russia is turning off the fossil fuel taps. While not a huge obstacle to oil procurement (there is plenty of oil in the world), natural gas is another matter. Russia controls 30% of the world’s natural gas reserves, and all but one of its gas pipelines go to western Europe.
Filling the huge supply gap left by Russia presents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for other producers to capture market share in one of the world’s most profitable regions; however, the lack of pipelines to other natural gas-producing regions means that liquid natural gas (LNG) must be transported by ship.
Largely because of transport costs, nearby producers with spare capacity like Qatar, Algeria, and Nigeria, will likely be the winners rather than Canada. In any case, Canada still benefits from the cascading effect of higher fuel prices. In the meantime, close to 20 projects have been proposed in Canada to export LNG through both coasts. Without doubt, there will be other opportunities.
“E” is for environmental backlash
As winter approaches and energy concerns grow, concerns have arisen that attractive prices and the renewed drive to obtain reliable fossil fuel supplies will set back efforts to combat climate change. For Europeans, there is no alternative to ESG; the “green deal” already in place prior to the war has been accelerated. Concurrently, however, a strong view is building that the definition of ESG needs to evolve, with many preferring “sustainability” and a focus on inclusion, rather than the exclusion often associated with ESG.
Overall, Canada’s oil and gas extraction and refining methods are considered very environmentally friendly. One example is a long-time holding in the Franklin Bissett portfolios, ARC Resources Ltd. Rather than pay others to dispose of wastewater from the drilling process, the company’s Montney operation recycles and reuses the water.
The other two letters in ESG — “S” for social and “G” for governance — should not be ignored. In an era where enormous value is being placed on reliability, a stable workforce and good corporate governance have become at least as important as efficiency. Under these criteria as well, Canada performs better than most; the Canadian oil and gas industry is recognized globally for strong social progress and governance metrics.
Agriculture: food for thought
The global response to threats of food shortages has been to advocate opening up more land for crops, but the planet has a limited amount of cropland. Significantly, almost half of the grains produced worldwide are used for animal feed, which people then consume indirectly by eating meat. In Europe, we are seeing an increase in vegetarianism; if meat consumption were to decline further because of the current situation, it could potentially lead to new patterns of behaviour that imply lower demand for animal feed. Elsewhere, food insecurity is growing, especially across Africa.
Ukraine is a major producer of sunflower oils, barley and maize (corn). Grain prices peaked in June as the United Nations struck a deal to allow some Ukraine grain shipments from Mariupol, but there is no guarantee it will continue. In countries most at risk of shortages from the disruptions, such as Nigeria and Bangladesh, people already tend to pay the largest proportion of their budgets for food. Turkey and Egypt are also very exposed to Russian wheat and have little reserve stock. Continue Reading…
Posted By 
Posted By 
Posted By 
