Donate to Remove ads

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

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Unilever - Half-year Report

For discussion of the practicalities of setting up and operating income-portfolios which follow the HYP Group Guidelines. READ Guidelines before posting
Forum rules
Tight HYP discussions only please - OT please discuss in strategies
idpickering
The full Lemon
Posts: 11276
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:04 pm
Has thanked: 2468 times
Been thanked: 5763 times

Unilever - Half-year Report

#429495

Postby idpickering » July 22nd, 2021, 7:12 am

First half highlights

· Underlying sales growth of 5.4%, with 4.0% volume and 1.3% price. Price growth stepped up in Q2

· Turnover increased 0.3% including a positive impact of 1.4% from acquisitions net of disposals and negative impact of 6.1% from currency related items

· Underlying operating margin of 18.8%, a decrease of 100bps driven by investment behind our brands and input cost inflation

· Underlying earnings per share down 2.0%, including a negative impact of 6.3% from currency

· Free cash flow of €2.4 billion, compared to €2.9 billion in the first half of 2020

· Quarterly shareholder dividend of €0.4268 per share and share buyback programme of up to €3 billion underway

Div £ 0.3693, ex div 5 Aug 21, paid 8 Sep 21



https://www.investegate.co.uk/unilever- ... 00060535G/

monabri
Lemon Half
Posts: 8396
Joined: January 7th, 2017, 9:56 am
Has thanked: 1539 times
Been thanked: 3428 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429535

Postby monabri » July 22nd, 2021, 9:39 am

Not gone down too well. Rising commodity prices affecting margins.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... rial-costs

scrumpyjack
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4817
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:15 am
Has thanked: 606 times
Been thanked: 2676 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429539

Postby scrumpyjack » July 22nd, 2021, 9:50 am

monabri wrote:Not gone down too well. Rising commodity prices affecting margins.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... rial-costs


This will be a test of the supposed strength of Unilever's brands. The whole point a a strong brand is that it gives the manufacturer pricing power, so if their brands are as strong as claimed they should be able to push up prices to recover these costs.

It is interesting that they only managed about a 1% rise in selling prices but a 4% rise in volumes in these results. It is good to see volume rises but price increases well below the rate of inflation does not support the contention that their brands are very strong. I guess that is why the SP has been weak for quite some time and they fell another 4% today.

blobby
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 187
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 10:13 am
Has thanked: 140 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429554

Postby blobby » July 22nd, 2021, 10:37 am

My understanding of the poor results is that the figures are down due to exchange rates.

On the bright side the yield is up, currently at 3.6% which seems attractive from a historical point of view, still not great though in comparison to what we would look for from a HYP. If it gets to a 5% yield then that would be more firmly in my HYP territory.

idpickering
The full Lemon
Posts: 11276
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:04 pm
Has thanked: 2468 times
Been thanked: 5763 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429568

Postby idpickering » July 22nd, 2021, 11:04 am

I’m not letting the moves in ULVR’s share price distract me, and am thinking longer term than just today. Either way, this outstanding firm is on sale today!

Ian.

daveh
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2191
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:06 am
Has thanked: 409 times
Been thanked: 807 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429598

Postby daveh » July 22nd, 2021, 12:05 pm

idpickering wrote:I’m not letting the moves in ULVR’s share price distract me, and am thinking longer term than just today. Either way, this outstanding firm is on sale today!

Ian.


Damn, I bought yesterday 'cos it was a HSDL cheap dealing day - should have waited until today and I'd have got ~7 extra shares for my cash. bet the price will have gone back up when I have more dividends available for my next top up.

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3523
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 1546 times
Been thanked: 1402 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429778

Postby moorfield » July 22nd, 2021, 10:34 pm

blobby wrote:On the bright side the yield is up, currently at 3.6% which seems attractive from a historical point of view, still not great though in comparison to what we would look for from a HYP. If it gets to a 5% yield then that would be more firmly in my HYP territory.



That is the wrong way to look at our perennial favourite low yielder, I would suggest.
(And in fact it is technically a HYP high yielder currently at greater than the FTSE100.)

I've calculated that were I to double the size of my ULVR holding tomorrow, my overall portfolio yield would change from 5.8% to 5.6%. And I would have to increase it 15 times before my overall portfolio yielded less than CTY 4.9% (my own benchmark) - but of course its weight would be grossly skewed in that scenario.

So I hazard a guess that everyone has room to add (more) ULVR into their portfolios, without dragging noticeably on overall yield.

An opportunity not to be missed while the SP looks depressed ?

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429816

Postby Arborbridge » July 23rd, 2021, 6:50 am

moorfield wrote:
blobby wrote:On the bright side the yield is up, currently at 3.6% which seems attractive from a historical point of view, still not great though in comparison to what we would look for from a HYP. If it gets to a 5% yield then that would be more firmly in my HYP territory.



That is the wrong way to look at our perennial favourite low yielder, I would suggest.
(And in fact it is technically a HYP high yielder currently at greater than the FTSE100.)

I've calculated that were I to double the size of my ULVR holding tomorrow, my overall portfolio yield would change from 5.8% to 5.6%. And I would have to increase it 15 times before my overall portfolio yielded less than CTY 4.9% (my own benchmark) - but of course its weight would be grossly skewed in that scenario.

So I hazard a guess that everyone has room to add (more) ULVR into their portfolios, without dragging noticeably on overall yield.

An opportunity not to be missed while the SP looks depressed ?


Or alternatively, you might say: the only way to keep your HYP in the zone, is to make sure every component is in the zone. 8-)

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429817

Postby Arborbridge » July 23rd, 2021, 6:55 am

blobby wrote:My understanding of the poor results is that the figures are down due to exchange rates.

On the bright side the yield is up, currently at 3.6% which seems attractive from a historical point of view, still not great though in comparison to what we would look for from a HYP. If it gets to a 5% yield then that would be more firmly in my HYP territory.


As regards waiting for 5% - I'd suggest if that happened, it might indicated a wider problem with ULVR. At least, that's what happened with similar low-ish yielders such as WPP - which I had been "hunting" for years and bought when the yield rose to above its norm.

For ULVR, I'd advocate buying when the yield is around "as good as it gets" which is around 3.5-4% - although in the financial crash it rose to 4.5% on occasion.

Arb.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429821

Postby Arborbridge » July 23rd, 2021, 7:16 am

I haven't done this for a while - possibly because there are websites publishing yield charts - but it's quite fun to do, and one can add one's own purchases and an RPI line:-

Image


ULVR is pretty good for yield right now, but anyone who didn't buy in March 2020 missed the best recent high.
Did anyone? I probably missed it because I had a "full house" of ULVR and there were other competing shares. I wonder if we will get another bite of the cherry today?

NB I've cheated a bit by adding the September dividend as though it happened yesterday (I will correct that later in the year) and also I haven't bothered to update the RPI line. As regards "brands" pricing power - overall, the ULVR dividend has advanced faster than RPI which is comforting. Yes, I know the question is, will it do so from now on?....

Arb.

Gersemi
Lemon Slice
Posts: 492
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:57 pm
Has thanked: 535 times
Been thanked: 222 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429844

Postby Gersemi » July 23rd, 2021, 8:42 am

Arborbridge wrote:
As regards waiting for 5% - I'd suggest if that happened, it might indicated a wider problem with ULVR. At least, that's what happened with similar low-ish yielders such as WPP - which I had been "hunting" for years and bought when the yield rose to above its norm.

For ULVR, I'd advocate buying when the yield is around "as good as it gets" which is around 3.5-4% - although in the financial crash it rose to 4.5% on occasion.

Arb.


I bought in April 2009, which I see is gratifyingly near the most recent high. This was of course just after the financial crash. It was far from being the highest yield on offer at the time. I bought it because I wasn't sure what to buy (or indeed whether to buy anything) and it seemed to be an opportunity to buy a "good quality" share at a bargain price. I have been very satisfied with my purchase.

These sales only come along every few years. It's easy to think that when they happen you will fill your boots, but when one happens you have to be very brave to do so!

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429849

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » July 23rd, 2021, 8:55 am

As I've pointed out here viewtopic.php?p=429692#p429692

EPS is up this half year by 3.8% when using constant currency. Just buy the dip.

I would be buying it now but I'm overweight ULVR which is my second biggest holding.

Matt

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429857

Postby Arborbridge » July 23rd, 2021, 9:37 am

Gersemi wrote:These sales only come along every few years. It's easy to think that when they happen you will fill your boots, but when one happens you have to be very brave to do so!


How true that is!! When we are given the opportunity, all the doubts crowd on us, amplified by all the naysaying scribblers. Hold fast and go for it.

Arb.

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3523
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 1546 times
Been thanked: 1402 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429888

Postby moorfield » July 23rd, 2021, 11:30 am

Arborbridge wrote:
As regards waiting for 5% - I'd suggest if that happened, it might indicated a wider problem with ULVR. At least, that's what happened with similar low-ish yielders such as WPP - which I had been "hunting" for years and bought when the yield rose to above its norm.



It's relative yield that matters, 5% vs. 3% "market" yield might be a sign of a problem, but 5% vs. 5% perhaps not.

I know the feeling re WPP, and then it slashed both its dividend and sp since I bought it and has become a "brown dwarf" in my portfolio. Neither a candidate for top up or disposal any time soon.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429891

Postby Arborbridge » July 23rd, 2021, 11:35 am

moorfield wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:
As regards waiting for 5% - I'd suggest if that happened, it might indicated a wider problem with ULVR. At least, that's what happened with similar low-ish yielders such as WPP - which I had been "hunting" for years and bought when the yield rose to above its norm.



It's relative yield that matters, 5% vs. 3% "market" yield might be a sign of a problem, but 5% vs. 5% perhaps not.

I know the feeling re WPP, and then it slashed both its dividend and sp since I bought it and has become a "brown dwarf" in my portfolio. Neither a candidate for top up or disposal any time soon.


Brown dwarf - I like that, a new piece of HYP jargon.

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3523
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 1546 times
Been thanked: 1402 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429901

Postby moorfield » July 23rd, 2021, 11:51 am

Arborbridge wrote:
moorfield wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:
As regards waiting for 5% - I'd suggest if that happened, it might indicated a wider problem with ULVR. At least, that's what happened with similar low-ish yielders such as WPP - which I had been "hunting" for years and bought when the yield rose to above its norm.



It's relative yield that matters, 5% vs. 3% "market" yield might be a sign of a problem, but 5% vs. 5% perhaps not.

I know the feeling re WPP, and then it slashed both its dividend and sp since I bought it and has become a "brown dwarf" in my portfolio. Neither a candidate for top up or disposal any time soon.


Brown dwarf - I like that, a new piece of HYP jargon.




Ha ha yes. What I term "brown dwarf" is a low yielder (less than FTSE100) that has lost both capital and dividend since it was originally bought, and just sits near the bottom of my top up list. The other "brown dwarf" I have currently is HSBA.

AZN on the other hand is a low yielder but has increased in capital value, a lot. I'll have to think of another astronomical term for that.

CLLN of course went "supernova" - bang, spectacularly, and I've only just about stopped feeling the effect four years later ...

And SAN (strictly o/t here) is one of my "pulsars", just pumping out a steady dividend year after year ...
Last edited by moorfield on July 23rd, 2021, 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

monabri
Lemon Half
Posts: 8396
Joined: January 7th, 2017, 9:56 am
Has thanked: 1539 times
Been thanked: 3428 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429904

Postby monabri » July 23rd, 2021, 11:59 am

Since my first buys of HSBA, it certainly has been "brown"....

I think I'll stop there with any further similies. :shock:

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429907

Postby Gengulphus » July 23rd, 2021, 12:12 pm

Arborbridge wrote:Image
ULVR is pretty good for yield right now, but anyone who didn't buy in March 2020 missed the best recent high. ...

Something odd about your chart or your comment there, because the chart shows Unilever's yield as being higher in January 2021 than March 2020 (both dates approximate, due to eyeballing them off the chart).

I think it's probably something odd about the chart, as https://dividenddata.co.uk/dividend-yield.py?epic=ULVR (click the "5y" button) shows the March 2020 peak as being higher than the January 2021 peak. And on clicking the "10y" button, it also shows the March 2020 peak as being higher than the peaks in 2013 and 2014, again unlike your chart.

A possibility about what the oddity is: the March 2020 share price low (which of course will coincide with dividend yield peaks over short periods in which no new dividends happen) was quite a sharp downwards spike: the lowest intraday price was 3583.5p on 16 March 2020, the lowest closing price was 3726p, also on 16 March 2020, and the share price only went below 3840p at all on the four days 12, 13, 16 and 17 March 2020 and only closed below it on the first three of those days. So if the price data your chart is based on happens to miss those days, the yield spike could be cut off in your chart. For example, if you use weekly closing price data that happens to be taken on Wednesdays (quite a good choice because it minimises the number of weeks that need special treatment because of bank holidays), the actual closing share price low in March 2020 would be 3726p but the March 2020 low in your data would be 3977.5p on the 25th. That would make the actual yield peak a factor of 3977.5p/3726p = 1.0675 times higher than would be visible in the chart - which would make a difference between a peak of about 3.7% as shown in your chart and an actual peak yield of about 3.95%.

Or if the weekly closing price data were taken on the last trading day of the week (which would normally be Fridays, is probably the more natural choice, and is what the FT does), the March 2020 low in your data would be 3854.5p on the 13th, the factor would be 3854.5p/3726p = 1.0345, and the actual peak yield would be about 3.83%.

Not saying that's the actual explanation of the discrepancy between the peak heights in your chart and in dividenddata's - you're in a far better position to determine that than I am, as you know the actual data your chart is based on and I can only look at a few possibilities. But it does illustrate one of the difficulties of producing charts that completely accurately reflect reality: markets can produce some very short-term spikes that are liable to be missed simply because the spike happens entirely between the data points you use! And such spikes are particularly likely to occur around share price peaks and lows when markets are turbulent... (This can be dealt with by judicious use of Open/High/Low/Close share price data when preparing the chart, but that's liable to be quite a bit more work if you've only gathered closing prices so far...)

I should also say that the reality of share purchases for most HYPers is of course that they pick times to make them that fit in with other things they're doing, rather than watching the market price every day (or even at all times during market hours if one were to try to catch intraday peaks and lows!), and of course you never see that a price is a significant peak or low until after it's passed! So the peaks on a completely accurate yield chart are only the yields one might have happened to catch if one had happened to be very lucky - not yields one might reasonably expect to catch!

Finally, another three possible explanations of or contributors to the difference between your yield chart and dividenddata's: firstly, exchange rates. Dividenddata's chart shows a March 2020 peak pretty close to a quarter of the way up from 3.75% to 5.0%, i.e. to 4.0625%. That's far too many significant figures for a figure 'eyeballed' off a chart, of course, but it is pretty clear that the peak shown is over 4%, and that's a bit higher than the plausible actual yield peaks indicated above because of share price spikes between data points. But if you look at dividenddata's yield calculation (at the bottom of its chart page), it basically assumes that the shareholder receives and accumulates their dividends in euros over the year without converting them to sterling, and then translates them to sterling at the prevailing exchange rate at the end of the year. This is of course not what most UK-based HYPers are likely to do: they will probably receive their dividends in sterling, already converted from euros by Unilever.

Secondly, dates: examining dividenddata's calculation further, they're including a dividend in it if it was announced in the last year (e.g. the dividend announced yesterday is already in it. I suspect a more natural thing for a HYPer to do is to include it if it was paid in the last year - or one might also reasonably include it if it went ex-dividend in the last year.

Thirdly, 'dividend lag': if a HYPer bases their yield calculation on their actual shareholdings and dividends received, and they bought some of their shares in the preceding year, they may not have received a full year's worth of dividends from all their shares. This will depress the average yield of their holding for that year if it's calculated as (dividends received from holding during the preceding year)/(value of holding at the end of the year).

Gengulphus

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429917

Postby Gengulphus » July 23rd, 2021, 12:40 pm

moorfield wrote:Ha ha yes. What I term "brown dwarf" is a low yielder (less than FTSE100) that has lost both capital and dividend since it was originally bought, and just sits near the bottom of my top up list. The other "brown dwarf" I have currently is HSBA.

AZN on the other hand is a low yielder but has increased in capital value, a lot. I'll have to think of another astronomical term for that.

A "red giant" might fit the bill if you've held it for long enough, I think - it's grown enormously in size, and it has lower-intensity emissions than when you first had it, but due to the size increase, its total emissions are nicely larger. (If you haven't held it as long, they're no larger - but also not fading...)

moorfield wrote:CLLN of course went "supernova" - bang, spectacularly, and I've only just about stopped feeling the effect four years later ...

I'd regard it as a "black hole" rather than a "supernova" - it collapsed into nothing more than a distorted bit of space (in my memory), rather than exploding to produce very substantial amounts of useful stuff (though I may be rather biased in viewing the stuff emitted by supernovas as useful, by the fact that like all of us, I quite largely consist of such stuff...).

Gengulphus

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: Unilever - Half-year Report

#429972

Postby Arborbridge » July 23rd, 2021, 5:25 pm

Gengulphus wrote:Something odd about your chart or your comment there, because the chart shows Unilever's yield as being higher in January 2021 than March 2020 (both dates approximate, due to eyeballing them off the chart).

I think it's probably something odd about the chart, as https://dividenddata.co.uk/dividend-yield.py?epic=ULVR (click the "5y" button) shows the March 2020 peak as being higher than the January 2021 peak. And on clicking the "10y" button, it also shows the March 2020 peak as being higher than the peaks in 2013 and 2014, again unlike your chart.

A possibility about what the oddity is: the March 2020 share price low (which of course will coincide with dividend yield peaks over short periods in which no new dividends happen) was quite a sharp downwards spike: the lowest intraday price was 3583.5p on 16 March 2020, the lowest closing price was 3726p, also on 16 March 2020, and the share price only went below 3840p at all on the four days 12, 13, 16 and 17 March 2020 and only closed below it on the first three of those days. So if the price data your chart is based on happens to miss those days, the yield spike could be cut off in your chart. For example, if you use weekly closing price data that happens to be taken on Wednesdays (quite a good choice because it minimises the number of weeks that need special treatment because of bank holidays), the actual closing share price low in March 2020 would be 3726p but the March 2020 low in your data would be 3977.5p on the 25th. That would make the actual yield peak a factor of 3977.5p/3726p = 1.0675 times higher than would be visible in the chart - which would make a difference between a peak of about 3.7% as shown in your chart and an actual peak yield of about 3.95%.

Or if the weekly closing price data were taken on the last trading day of the week (which would normally be Fridays, is probably the more natural choice, and is what the FT does), the March 2020 low in your data would be 3854.5p on the 13th, the factor would be 3854.5p/3726p = 1.0345, and the actual peak yield would be about 3.83%.

Not saying that's the actual explanation of the discrepancy between the peak heights in your chart and in dividenddata's - you're in a far better position to determine that than I am, as you know the actual data your chart is based on and I can only look at a few possibilities. But it does illustrate one of the difficulties of producing charts that completely accurately reflect reality: markets can produce some very short-term spikes that are liable to be missed simply because the spike happens entirely between the data points you use! And such spikes are particularly likely to occur around share price peaks and lows when markets are turbulent... (This can be dealt with by judicious use of Open/High/Low/Close share price data when preparing the chart, but that's liable to be quite a bit more work if you've only gathered closing prices so far...)

I should also say that the reality of share purchases for most HYPers is of course that they pick times to make them that fit in with other things they're doing, rather than watching the market price every day (or even at all times during market hours if one were to try to catch intraday peaks and lows!), and of course you never see that a price is a significant peak or low until after it's passed! So the peaks on a completely accurate yield chart are only the yields one might have happened to catch if one had happened to be very lucky - not yields one might reasonably expect to catch!

Finally, another three possible explanations of or contributors to the difference between your yield chart and dividenddata's: firstly, exchange rates. Dividenddata's chart shows a March 2020 peak pretty close to a quarter of the way up from 3.75% to 5.0%, i.e. to 4.0625%. That's far too many significant figures for a figure 'eyeballed' off a chart, of course, but it is pretty clear that the peak shown is over 4%, and that's a bit higher than the plausible actual yield peaks indicated above because of share price spikes between data points. But if you look at dividenddata's yield calculation (at the bottom of its chart page), it basically assumes that the shareholder receives and accumulates their dividends in euros over the year without converting them to sterling, and then translates them to sterling at the prevailing exchange rate at the end of the year. This is of course not what most UK-based HYPers are likely to do: they will probably receive their dividends in sterling, already converted from euros by Unilever.

Secondly, dates: examining dividenddata's calculation further, they're including a dividend in it if it was announced in the last year (e.g. the dividend announced yesterday is already in it. I suspect a more natural thing for a HYPer to do is to include it if it was paid in the last year - or one might also reasonably include it if it went ex-dividend in the last year.

Thirdly, 'dividend lag': if a HYPer bases their yield calculation on their actual shareholdings and dividends received, and they bought some of their shares in the preceding year, they may not have received a full year's worth of dividends from all their shares. This will depress the average yield of their holding for that year if it's calculated as (dividends received from holding during the preceding year)/(value of holding at the end of the year).

Gengulphus



Gengulphus,

Thanks for your comments and your acute observational powers which have definitely spotted revealed a problem. Whether this is a big can of worms or just a minor one, I'm not sure!

I cut and paste prices from Yahoo, and choose "weekly" on the historic data tab. In this case the dates ran 2nd,9th, 16th, 23rd - each a Monday - so they do actually miss the sharp low you mention, and the max yield was missed.
That accounts for some of the difference, but there's something else which is worrying me. When I revisit prices on Yahoo, for example, to update a chart, I've sometimes noticed they are not necessarily the same as they were, and so it is here. When I went back to check subsequent to your observation, I find the prices are not the same as the ones I cut and pasted on the previous occasion. It's a though revision takes place a while afterwards, but I have no knowledge of when this happens.

Here's a cut and past from my spreadsheet which gives the price as it was originally on Yahoo, then the price shown for the same dates today. I copy the closing price in every case. The next columns are the yield plotted (based on the previous four dividend total of 148.18p) and the corrected yield from the revised prices. If I update the chart now, the highest yield of 3.98% would be a smidgen above the January 21 yield - though it would still miss the best yield which occurred.

Image


I have from time to time checked my charts against dividendata, and they are generally telling the same story. Quite what to do about the fact the Yahoo prices seem to bounce around, I'm not too clear - except maybe not plot anything until the prices are a month or two old or change sources.

Anyhow, thanks once more for spotting this,

Arb.


Return to “HYP Practical (See Group Guidelines)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests