floyd3592 wrote:AV. 2.2%
BAE 2.5%
BATS 3.7%
BDEV 2.4%
BLND 4.5%
BP 3.8%
BT.A 3.3%
DGE 3.9%
DLG 4.5%
GSK, 6.1%
HSBA 4.0%
IMB 4.9%
ITV 2.6%
LGEN 8.3%
NG., 7.2%
PHNX 3.9%
RDSB 5.3%
RIO 6.2%
SDR 6.5%
SLA 3.1%
ULVR 5.0%
VOD 2.5%
WPP 3.8%
Thanks. Using my own sector classification, my breakdown of that portfolio is:
FINANCIALS (32.5%)
==================
Insurance (18.9%)
-----------------
AV. 2.2%
DLG 4.5%
LGEN 8.3%
PHNX 3.9%
Asset Managers (9.6%)
---------------------
SDR 6.5% (should this be SDRC?)
SLA 3.1%
Banks (4.0%)
------------
HSBA 4.0%
HOLES IN THE GROUND (15.3%)
===========================
Oil & Gas Producers (9.1%)
--------------------------
BP 3.8%
RDSB 5.3%
Miners (6.2%)
------------
RIO 6.2%
UTILITIES (13.0%)
=================
Energy Utilities (7.2%)
-----------------------
NG. 7.2%
Telecoms Utilities (5.8%)
-------------------------
BT.A 3.3%
VOD 2.5%
'SINS' (12.5%)
==============
Tobacco (8.6%)
--------------
BATS 3.7%
IMB 4.9%
Booze (3.9%)
------------
DGE 3.9%
PROPERTY (6.7%)
===============
REITs (4.5%)
------------
BLND 4.5%
Housebuilders (2.4%)
--------------------
BDEV 2.4%
OTHER SECTORS (20.0%)
=====================
Media (6.4%)
------------
ITV 2.6%
WPP 3.8%
Pharmaceuticals (6.1%)
----------------------
GSK 6.1%
Food & Household Product Producers (5.0%)
-----------------------------------------
ULVR 5.0%
Defence (2.5%)
--------------
BA. 2.5%
Based on that, the first thing I would say is that IMHO you're already
well overweight in financials and within them, especially insurance. I would steer well clear of any further purchases of them for the foreseeable future (*). That reduces your list of four shares to just two (Imperial Brands and RDSB) and also gets rid of my previous support for considering Legal & General. My previous comments on Imperial Brands and RDSB still apply, and both of their sectors are pretty fully weighted, at 8.6% and 9.1% respectively (average sector weighting in a 15-sector portfolio would be 6.7%. If you do nevertheless still want to consider adding to tobacco, I would suggest also considering BATS - its yield is lower, at least in Itsallaguess's table posted above (**): it's got a lower yield than Imperial Brands, but still an entirely adequately high one, and it does look to have stabilised since losing its way a bit in 2017 and 2018.
Other than those, looking at Itsallaguess's table together with your weightings throws up a few shares that strike me as worth taking a detailed look at:
* A top up of BAE Systems - decently high yield, lowly weighted for company and sector, decent very long-term dividend record. They've deferred a decision about whether/when to pay last year's final dividend, but their RNSes in
April and
yesterday both talk about their cash position being strong, suggesting that it was just a deferral to keep cash in hand in case things turned really bad for the company, and that since that doesn't appear to have happened, the chances of them deciding to pay the deferred dividend when they provide the update on it at their announcement of their interim results on July 30th aren't bad. No promises, though - the risk of their dividend prospects being worse than they appear is non-trivial, but then again, there are few companies around at present for which that isn't the case!
* A water utility. United Utilities has the highest yield and the only one that is unambiguously 'high yield', but a rather mediocre very long-term dividend record. Severn Trent and Pennon have yields in the region of the FTSE100's - probably lower than it, but within the range of uncertainty about just how the FTSE100 yield should be calculated at present and/or the range of current share price fluctuations - and pretty good very long-term dividend records. All three have reported final results in the last month or so and have announced normal dividend rises. About future dividends, United Utilities did say "
We will review our dividend policy for AMP7 as a clearer picture of the post COVID-19 economic environment emerges." and Pennon's situation is unclear because it's just made a major disposal of its Viridor waste business, which will reduce the company's earnings but also means that it is talking about returning capital to shareholders: the former would be expected to reduce the dividend but the latter might well counteract that reduction (as e.g. doing the capital return by a special dividend + share consolidation would). All in all, I think Severn Trent would be the first of the three that I would consider in detail, but the others might well also be worth a look.
* DS Smith - decently high yield, new sector for your HYP, did cut by 50% in the 2008-9 financial crisis cut has grown its dividend excellently since then. It did cancel its interim dividend in
early April, but the general tone of that trading statement sounds to me more like being prudent with cash when things were very uncertain than any real difficulty, and it does indicate that announcing a dividend payment with their final results next month was still very much on the table. Their business (packaging, especially corrugated cardboard) does also suggest to me that they may well be experiencing a silver lining to the COVID-19 cloud, given the increase in getting things delivered. So I read it as a possibility not unlike the one I describe for BAE Systems above: could well have very decent dividend prospects, but not a sure thing.
None of those suggestions are recommendations to buy, by the way, just recommendations to take a good look and decide whether you like them.
(*) Though note that the amount of the future I think is foreseeable is especially low at present.
(**) Do double-check all yields anyone else gives for being reasonable and up to date before relying on them, especially in times like these when things are particularly likely to have changed recently...
Gengulphus