Quality HYP

[Arborbridge]

Even the staunchest of HYPers agree it is ok for others to do this, so I don't see the problem. It seems it makes no difference, other than language, as to whether this entire portfolio is a "HYP", or whether it is a "HYPish" portfolio with multi-components, one of which is a "HYP", the other bits being non-HYP, or HYPish.

Whether it makes a difference or not depends what one is trying to achieve. If one wants to discuss the HYP or HYP-ish portfolio on HYP-P, then it should be within the bounds of the board, otherwise it's all fair game as long as one does not pretend it is a HYP when it isn't. A high yield portfolio it may be, but it may not be a HYP.

From my POV, as I expect you've seen me write before, I would rather keep my HYP "clean". The point for me is that I can then benchmark it against my incIT or incOEIC portfolios to compare my performance against that of professionals. You might also have noticed that I don't compare particularly well! That, I believe is probably owing to my lack of attention to safety factors, but my performance is probably fairly typical of a moderately knowledgable amateur investor. I can't say for sure that it shows a classic HYP does not work - indeed, until C-19 it most certainly did what it said on the tin, so it probably does work. No one said it would be the best in class, and the way I run it, my HYP isn't.

Arb.

[Wizard]

I now think there are layers of HYP (different to what I thought a couple of weeks back).

1. HYP as practiced by PYAD
The strictest of all HYPs. Every share high yield, all from FTSE350, no foreign shares, no selling other than forced by the market, no ITs and that includes REITs.

2. HYP as per TLF HYP-P guidelines
Can relax above to allow up to 5% non qualifying shares (eg foreign), some ITs allowed (must be REITs or ‘quasi-REITs’*) and the intension should be LTBH but a later rebalance or complete sale acceptable if the company situation changes (eg cancelled dividend).

3. Other HYP
Something that is HYP in intent but breaches the rules of type 2. (eg more foreign shares or non ‘quasi-REITs’ included). But it is still HYP given the recently rediscovered Lost HYP Sea Scroll

As it is stricter than type 2. an HYP from type 1. could be discussed on HYP-P, but one from type 3. could not. A lot of that will come down to if an individual is happy to track just the type 2. compliant portfolio subset of their type 3. broadest style HYP. Of course that is for the whole portfolio, for individual shares then any share that has at some time been eligible for a type 2. HYP can be discussed on HYP-P, but only with respect to buying it when it is qualifies for inclusion in a type 2. HYP at that point in time.

Well that is how I currently understand it anyway.

* I think Mods would save themselves time in the long run if the HYP-P guidelines were amended in include a list of acceptable ‘quasi-REITs’, given my understanding that it is a term used nowhere other than TLF.

[Breelander]

1. HYP as practiced by PYAD
The strictest of all HYPs. Every share high yield, all from FTSE350, no foreign shares, no selling other than forced by the market, no ITs and that includes REITs.

No, not quite that strict, pyad holds a REIT in HYP1, Landsec.

Landsec has been a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) since the UK introduced the status in 2007.

https://landsec.com/investorsshareholde ... -dividends

[dealtn]

1. HYP as practiced by PYAD
The strictest of all HYPs. Every share high yield, all from FTSE350, no foreign shares, no selling other than forced by the market, no ITs and that includes REITs.

No, not quite that strict, pyad holds a REIT in HYP1, Landsec.

Landsec has been a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) since the UK introduced the status in 2007.

https://landsec.com/investorsshareholde ... -dividends

Yet HYP1 pre-dates that. It would, though, be interesting to know if he would have excluded it on those grounds were REITs in existence at the time. There would be one fewer thing to argue about.

[MrFoolish]

1. HYP as practiced by PYAD

I think it would be fairer to say: HYP as recommended by PYAD. Did he ever say he followed it himself to the exclusion of other strategies? He also had a demonstration value portfolio on TMF, though I seem to recall it was something of a car crash.

[Wizard]

1. HYP as practiced by PYAD

I think it would be fairer to say: HYP as recommended by PYAD. Did he ever say he followed it himself to the exclusion of other strategies? He also had a demonstration value portfolio on TMF, though I seem to recall it was something of a car crash.

That is a fair point. He did say he followed type 1. in his demo portfolios, I don't know what he does in his 'real' investments. But he seems to focus on reporting his demo portfolios so maybe not in the 'real' ones. Of course he was far from the same type of investor as he thought ideal for type 1. HYP so that would not be a surprise. But then few, if any, on TLF fit his description as the ideal type 1. HYP investor.

My theoretically ideal HYPer was a person disinterested in the market yet willing to take the risks with income and capital that characterise an equity portfolio compared with fixed interest alternatives like gilts. The demo portfolios I run are there to prove that my ideas have merit (or not), though it will take quite a time for this to be shown since they are intended for the very long term. They are just my ideas and I am not suggesting this is the only way to go for HYPs. Clearly everyone who runs an HYP will do it their own way in any event but since I write about the strategy, I write about my preferred way while realising naturally that it will not suit everyone. You can't please 'em all, so I tend to aim my version of the strategy at my theoretical HYPer, that granny in Hove whose daughter has set up a permanent portfolio.

https://web.archive.org/web/20111224174 ... 031212.htm

The bizarre irony being that his ideal HYPer would never read a word he wrote and not even know they had an HYP

[MrFoolish]

It's also ironic that PYAD said "Clearly everyone who runs an HYP will do it their own way" - and yet when people try to do it their own way on the Practical board, some will jump on it for being off-topic!!

[CryptoPlankton]

I now think there are layers of HYP (different to what I thought a couple of weeks back).

1. HYP as practiced by PYAD
The strictest of all HYPs. Every share high yield, all from FTSE350, no foreign shares, no selling other than forced by the market, no ITs and that includes REITs.

2. HYP as per TLF HYP-P guidelines
Can relax above to allow up to 5% non qualifying shares (eg foreign), some ITs allowed (must be REITs or ‘quasi-REITs’*) and the intension should be LTBH but a later rebalance or complete sale acceptable if the company situation changes (eg cancelled dividend).

3. Other HYP
Something that is HYP in intent but breaches the rules of type 2. (eg more foreign shares or non ‘quasi-REITs’ included). But it is still HYP given the recently rediscovered Lost HYP Sea Scroll

As it is stricter than type 2. an HYP from type 1. could be discussed on HYP-P, but one from type 3. could not. A lot of that will come down to if an individual is happy to track just the type 2. compliant portfolio subset of their type 3. broadest style HYP. Of course that is for the whole portfolio, for individual shares then any share that has at some time been eligible for a type 2. HYP can be discussed on HYP-P, but only with respect to buying it when it is qualifies for inclusion in a type 2. HYP at that point in time.

Well that is how I currently understand it anyway.

I think your understanding is more or less correct. What I find difficult to comprehend is how hard it seems for some people to grasp this. As the owner of a "Type 3" (and as part of a broader portfolio), I have always understood pretty well what is acceptable and not acceptable for discussion on "HYP -P". It doesn't matter what I think about the strictness of the guidelines, they are what they are and I try to respect them. I am more than happy to discuss "off-topic" (for that board) matters regarding income investing on other boards such a High Yield Shares and Strategies, Investment Strategies, Investment Trusts etc. I have never understood why posters who have no interest in posting within HYP-P's guidelines aren't prepared to simply give it a wide berth.

Having said that, a lot of time and energy seems to go into discussing HYP (types 1, 2 and 3!) on this board, which is okay, but can diminish its potential somewhat. This thread started with an interesting proposition for an income portfolio, but seems to have been dominated by discussion of HYP. I don't know whether people are aware, but there is no compulsion to discuss income strategies in terms of "HYP" on this board. It is the "High Yield Shares and Strategies - general" board. I, for one, would prefer that "HYP" is left on "HYP-P" (except maybe when someone wants to start a thread specifically about it that would be off-topic for that board) and this board just does what it says on the tin - get on with talking about high yield strategies with no restrictions...

[Alaric]

I, for one, would prefer that "HYP" is left on "HYP-P" (except maybe when someone wants to start a thread specifically about it that would be off-topic for that board) and this board just does what it says on the tin - get on with talking about high yield strategies with no restrictions...

The general problem is that anything critical or sceptical of "the HYP Strategy" is treated as off topic for that board, so therefore has to come to this one, or elsewhere on TLF.

[jackdaww]

I, for one, would prefer that "HYP" is left on "HYP-P" (except maybe when someone wants to start a thread specifically about it that would be off-topic for that board) and this board just does what it says on the tin - get on with talking about high yield strategies with no restrictions...

The general problem is that anything critical or sceptical of "the HYP Strategy" is treated as off topic for that board, so therefore has to come to this one, or elsewhere on TLF.

=========================

yes , if we indulge in critical comment , we are told to go and play elsewhere ..

[CryptoPlankton]

I, for one, would prefer that "HYP" is left on "HYP-P" (except maybe when someone wants to start a thread specifically about it that would be off-topic for that board) and this board just does what it says on the tin - get on with talking about high yield strategies with no restrictions...

The general problem is that anything critical or sceptical of "the HYP Strategy" is treated as off topic for that board, so therefore has to come to this one, or elsewhere on TLF.

Where's the problem? If you want to criticise the HYP strategy then you start a thread here (as I said where you have quoted me!). There's no need for that "scepticism" to leak into other high yield strategy threads though - the world doesn't revolve around HYP and not even the HYP "purists" suggest it does. But I see no reason why they can't just get on with it in peace on HYP -P.

[Alaric]

But I see no reason why they can't just get on with it in peace on HYP -P.

What when they start discussing a share as a possible purchase? Some might consider it a "stinker". Where, if anywhere, can such a view be expressed?
If you use the dropdown "Quick Links - New Posts", you aren't always immediately conscious of which board a discussion is taking place on.

[dealtn]

What when they start discussing a share as a possible purchase? Some might consider it a "stinker". Where, if anywhere, can such a view be expressed?

If only there were a Board called "Share Ideas" and they were encouraged to discuss it there.

[moorfield]

I now think there are layers of HYP (different to what I thought a couple of weeks back).

1. HYP as practiced by PYAD
The strictest of all HYPs. Every share high yield, all from FTSE350, no foreign shares, no selling other than forced by the market, no ITs and that includes REITs.

2. HYP as per TLF HYP-P guidelines
Can relax above to allow up to 5% non qualifying shares (eg foreign), some ITs allowed (must be REITs or ‘quasi-REITs’*) and the intension should be LTBH but a later rebalance or complete sale acceptable if the company situation changes (eg cancelled dividend).

3. Other HYP
Something that is HYP in intent but breaches the rules of type 2. (eg more foreign shares or non ‘quasi-REITs’ included). But it is still HYP given the recently rediscovered Lost HYP Sea Scroll

4. I'll buy and sell when I feel like it HYP
Otherwise known as "not HYP".

[Alaric]

If only there were a Board called "Share Ideas" and they were encouraged to discuss it there.

That could make sense. Close down HYP - Practical entirely with all the traffic to go to Share ideas, specific Company threads or this general High Yield Strategies board. At a pinch it could be divided into Share ideas - Income and Share Ideas - Growth, although that just sets up room for disagreements as to what goes where.

[Lootman]

I, for one, would prefer that "HYP" is left on "HYP-P" (except maybe when someone wants to start a thread specifically about it that would be off-topic for that board) and this board just does what it says on the tin - get on with talking about high yield strategies with no restrictions...

The general problem is that anything critical or sceptical of "the HYP Strategy" is treated as off topic for that board, so therefore has to come to this one, or elsewhere on TLF.

Where's the problem? If you want to criticise the HYP strategy then you start a thread here (as I said where you have quoted me!). There's no need for that "scepticism" to leak into other high yield strategy threads though - the world doesn't revolve around HYP and not even the HYP "purists" suggest it does. But I see no reason why they can't just get on with it in peace on HYP -P.

I think what baffles a lot of people is why only HYP has a special "safe space" status and no other investment topic.

You can go to the Funds forum, for instance, and criticise funds in general or any particular fund. Same with all the other investment boards. But not HYP. Why the need for special protection? Why the need for immunity from criticism?

[AJC5001]

If you use the dropdown "Quick Links - New Posts", you aren't always immediately conscious of which board a discussion is taking place on.

I think this shows exactly the problem.

As I have learnt from the "Total Return Board" topic in the Biscuit Bar, a number of posters start from the "Quick Links - New Posts" and just pick some topic they like the look of REGARDLESS of the board the topic is in and ignoring any guidelines that board may have. (Even though they are well aware of such guidelines existing and it being fairly obvious what board they have landed on when they get there.)

Being a board with significant volume of posts, HYP - P will as a consequence attract the barrage of off-topic posts we see, followed by the descent into arguments about on/off topic, strategy, guidelines, pyad etc etc.

Perhaps to illustrate this point, at this point in time (15:17 on Sunday 17th May) there are 27 New Posts in the dropdown, none of which are on HYP-P. Also, there have been no new posts on HYP-P since 5:51pm on Friday. There were only 5 new topics on Friday, all of which had only the Original Post (no replies!) and four of them were for companies that were also posted on the Company News Board.

My conclusion, given the number of posts on the "proposed TR - total returns - strategies board" https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=23356 is that what is required is indeed an "Arguments" board.

Adrian

[CryptoPlankton]

But I see no reason why they can't just get on with it in peace on HYP -P.

What when they start discussing a share as a possible purchase? Some might consider it a "stinker". Where, if anywhere, can such a view be expressed?
If you use the dropdown "Quick Links - New Posts", you aren't always immediately conscious of which board a discussion is taking place on.

Well, if the discussion of whether a share is a "stinker" is in the context of HYP as in the guidelines for the board then I don't think there is a problem. If people want to discuss the relative merits of shares in other contexts then, as has been discussed, there are other boards.

I don't share your other issue as I have the site set up as "My favourite boards" on the old TMF and so always know what board I am choosing to look at. All I can say is that if people can't be bothered to look where they are going then they are bound to walk into the occasional lamppost...

[Itsallaguess]

The general problem is that anything critical or sceptical of "the HYP Strategy" is treated as off topic for that board, so therefore has to come to this one, or elsewhere on TLF.

Where's the problem? If you want to criticise the HYP strategy then you start a thread here (as I said where you have quoted me!). There's no need for that "scepticism" to leak into other high yield strategy threads though - the world doesn't revolve around HYP and not even the HYP "purists" suggest it does. But I see no reason why they can't just get on with it in peace on HYP -P.

I think what baffles a lot of people is why only HYP has a special "safe space" status and no other investment topic.

You can go to the Funds forum, for instance, and criticise funds in general or any particular fund. Same with all the other investment boards. But not HYP.

Why the need for special protection?

Why the need for immunity from criticism?

There is no immunity from criticism - that's a straw man...

There's simply a site-rule that says that any such criticism shouldn't take place on HYP Practical..

Those that persist in not understanding the difference are the real issue - and not those that simply want to get on and work within the site rules as they stand...

It seems that it's not enough for the current Lemon Fool site rules to say 'Yes, you can criticise the strategy, but just don't do it on that board'...

A small but persistent minority insist on demanding to do what they want, wherever they want - ignoring that one simple rule, and, worse than that in my view, persist on trying to turn almost every thread that they get involved with into yet another 'anti-HYP' manifesto...

Why is that, do you think, and why aren't *they* the focus of these types of persistent discussions, rather than the site-rules themselves, which we should all be bound to follow if we wish to continue using the site?

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[Alaric]

There's simply a site-rule that says that any such criticism shouldn't take place on HYP Practical..

That however is the point about that Board having a special protected status. A share is suggested for purchase. If you believe it to be a dog or a stinker where can these views be expressed? That's particularly if the reason it's high yield is because the share price has halved or more over the previous year or so.