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

Different ways of taking income

General discussions about equity high-yield income strategies
mickeypops
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 200
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:10 pm
Has thanked: 129 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#433637

Postby mickeypops » August 10th, 2021, 9:51 am

Itsallaguess wrote:Getting back on topic, this all of course completely misses the point that many income-investors are really *quite happy* to give up a level of total-return, because the income-based investment strategy that they might prefer to use delivers other benefits to them at the same time, and it's that primary point that often seems to be deliberately missed or denied with these types of discussions, but which actually forms the basis for many peoples preferences as to which approach they might prefer to take in the first place....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess


Exactly. Couldn’t have put it better myself.

For those of us requiring an income from our investments, the main alternative to a dividend harvesting approach would be some kind of safe withdrawal rate system, or one of its many variations. Often 4% is quoted and there is a ton of stuff about this online and elsewhere. The main risk often mentioned is the sequence of withdrawal risk whereby if the markets experience a serious downturn early in your retirement, it can wreak havoc on its long term viability. Dividend harvesting has its own risks of course, but refusing to sell off capital has its own layer of security.
Last edited by csearle on August 10th, 2021, 12:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: To correct quotes

Charlottesquare
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1775
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:22 pm
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 560 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434010

Postby Charlottesquare » August 11th, 2021, 11:50 am

1nvest wrote:
UnclePhilip wrote:there seems to be a continuing debate around whether it is more profitable to follow a 'total return and sell a few when needed' versus 'live off the dividends and/or yield'.

Another alternative that is more commonly employed by the very rich is to never sell. Have no regular income being produced (so no income tax) combined with not selling = no capital gains tax, and when you die the value is 'stepped up' i.e. heirs can sell the assets at a cost basis of the asset value at the time of your passing.

For income loans are taken out against the asset/portfolio value. Your executors following your passing can sell enough asset value to pay of those debts.

Consider £1M of asset/portfolio value, a inflation adjusted £20,000/year 'income' (additional loan) taken (borrowed) yearly where inflation rises at 3% and the portfolio/asset value rises at 5% (2% real) and the ongoing cost of borrowing/debt is also 5%. Comparable to a 2% SWR. Run that for 30 years (retirement years before passing) and heirs inherit a wealth near comparable to the inflation adjusted start date value after paying off the loan/debt. i.e. the asset value rises from the £1M start date value to £4.1M after 30 years, loan to asset value risen to 46% (£1.9M of debt including compounded interest) and the inflation index rises from 1.0 to 2.47. So £4.1M value - £1.9M debt = £2.2M, which relative to a 2.47 inflation factor = 89% of the inflation adjusted start date value available. In the 30th year when the asset value = £4.1M and debt is £1.9M the inflation adjusted 'withdrawn' amount (additional amount borrowed for 'income/spending') = £49K, 1.2% of the asset value, but as £1.9M is owed/debt = 2.2% of net asset minus debt value.

A more layman's approach might be to take out/expand mortgage loans/debt as the source of income. If home value is £500K and stock portfolio value is £500K then £20K of income is like a 4% SWR relative to just the stock value. And rather than arranging that yearly you might clump perhaps 4 or 5 years of spending at a time.


The catch with borrowing against assets is if your lenders all get cold feet (maybe not re you in particular but maybe become market spooked) and finding a replacement lender becomes difficult as at that moment (liquidity drought). I am sure it can be done but I would get nervous the lenders would act like lenders of umbrellas; happy to lend them when it is dry want them back when it rains, thus forcing sales at distressed prices.

A prime example of this was the behavior of banks re property lending post 2008, market dried, replacing lenders difficult, valuers got cagey as no market for assets placing even more stress on covenants. I do however appreciate shares are more liquid etc, but they are just assets and banks are like leopards. (We estimate they cost us over £3m by pushing us to sell 60 flats at the wrong time between 2010 and 2015)

Charlottesquare
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1775
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:22 pm
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 560 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434023

Postby Charlottesquare » August 11th, 2021, 12:21 pm

Having read a fair way through this thread it seems to me there is a lot of discussion of dividends/total return that really misses the point, all longer term returns, whether via share price movement or returned dividends, are really, when run to eternity, mere functions of a company's earnings. (other price movements are noise/non individual share factors)

All the payment of dividends does is decide that the funds earned are not retained in the company.

If we ignore internal ROCE calculations and frictional tax costs, which likely are in total very different company to company, , there really is nothing between the two viewpoints.

To me competing returns are nothing to do with the dividends and everything to do with company ROCE and frictional extraction costs yet we see few discussions on here re ROCE and dividends which do imho actually impact total return.

Dividends are mere convenience and give the initial investor a choice as to whether he buys more of what he already holds, spends part of the company earnings or buys some different investment, different investors will have different views as to whether say lower portfolio growth, if company has high ROCE foregone, or maybe leakage through tax, is a price worth paying for the tidiness that dividends offer.

Personally I mix and match, these days I buy ITs less on them paying dividends and more if I fancy the sector. If I had not changed to this approach I would certainly have missed Scottish Mortgage and some similar low yield holdings that have done well (though I am yet to take any income, building for circa 4-5 more years)

Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6032
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1398 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434033

Postby Alaric » August 11th, 2021, 12:46 pm

Charlottesquare wrote:Having read a fair way through this thread it seems to me there is a lot of discussion of dividends/total return that really misses the point, all longer term returns, whether via share price movement or returned dividends, are really, when run to eternity, mere functions of a company's earnings.


It seems to me that those who would advocate selection of shares by reference to their current running dividend yield are in denial over this point. Carillion demonstrated the vulnerability of this method to directors who would rather run a Company into the ground than cut, suspend or cancel a dividend.

Charlottesquare
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1775
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:22 pm
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 560 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434040

Postby Charlottesquare » August 11th, 2021, 12:53 pm

Alaric wrote:
Charlottesquare wrote:Having read a fair way through this thread it seems to me there is a lot of discussion of dividends/total return that really misses the point, all longer term returns, whether via share price movement or returned dividends, are really, when run to eternity, mere functions of a company's earnings.


It seems to me that those who would advocate selection of shares by reference to their current running dividend yield are in denial over this point. Carillion demonstrated the vulnerability of this method to directors who would rather run a Company into the ground than cut, suspend or cancel a dividend.


Carillion to me also demonstrated the problem of measuring earnings.

Given their real internal ROCE it may actually have been a good thing shareholders got something back via dividends as reducing working capital at least reduced the unprofitable contracts they were free to enter in to. (Then again maybe if they had possessed more balance sheet liquidity they would not have low balled their pricing so often)

Charlottesquare
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1775
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:22 pm
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 560 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434042

Postby Charlottesquare » August 11th, 2021, 12:56 pm

Alaric wrote:
Charlottesquare wrote:Having read a fair way through this thread it seems to me there is a lot of discussion of dividends/total return that really misses the point, all longer term returns, whether via share price movement or returned dividends, are really, when run to eternity, mere functions of a company's earnings.


It seems to me that those who would advocate selection of shares by reference to their current running dividend yield are in denial over this point. Carillion demonstrated the vulnerability of this method to directors who would rather run a Company into the ground than cut, suspend or cancel a dividend.


Of course P/E, which may or may not signify aptness of market valuation, is merely a combined yield and cover measurement.

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4140 times
Been thanked: 10023 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434065

Postby Itsallaguess » August 11th, 2021, 1:50 pm

Charlottesquare wrote:
Having read a fair way through this thread it seems to me there is a lot of discussion of dividends/total return that really misses the point, all longer term returns, whether via share price movement or returned dividends, are really, when run to eternity, mere functions of a company's earnings. (other price movements are noise/non individual share factors)


Free cash flow has been discussed many times on the income-based boards, as a useful method of filtering out those higher-yielding investments that might carry a greater level of risk than others.

As you say, the simple fact is that some companies operate in ways that make it difficult to measure the safety of any underlying ongoing business.

That's an issue for any type of investor to have to deal with, of course, no matter what investment strategy might be employed....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Charlottesquare
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1775
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:22 pm
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 560 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434086

Postby Charlottesquare » August 11th, 2021, 2:45 pm

Itsallaguess wrote:
Charlottesquare wrote:
Having read a fair way through this thread it seems to me there is a lot of discussion of dividends/total return that really misses the point, all longer term returns, whether via share price movement or returned dividends, are really, when run to eternity, mere functions of a company's earnings. (other price movements are noise/non individual share factors)


Free cash flow has been discussed many times on the income-based boards, as a useful method of filtering out those higher-yielding investments that might carry a greater level of risk than others.

As you say, the simple fact is that some companies operate in ways that make it difficult to measure the safety of any underlying ongoing business.

That's an issue for any type of investor to have to deal with, of course, no matter what investment strategy might be employed....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess


Free cashflow when looked at over a few years merely suggest to me whether the reported earnings are real and sustainable or made up and artificial.

My point is more that a share's current value may be looked at as the discounted sum of all cashflows it will ever make to its shareholders, the only difference viewing a single company that pays or does not pay dividends is comparing getting x every year for 100 years and getting y in a hundred years time, this difference is the difference between x and y discounted for time value, how well the company used the retained earnings (its ROCE) and if dividends are enjoyed what is the tax cost or tax benefit of receiving the income now as opposed to later?

Dividend investing and total return investing are similar to the secret of comedy-timing, or maybe TR should be labelled Delayed Gratification Investing and HY Current Gratification Investing , they are both merely different facets of the same force that increases a share's value, that force is earnings.

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4323
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 680 times
Been thanked: 1316 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434177

Postby 1nvest » August 11th, 2021, 8:13 pm

Charlottesquare wrote:Having read a fair way through this thread it seems to me there is a lot of discussion of dividends/total return that really misses the point, all longer term returns, whether via share price movement or returned dividends, are really, when run to eternity, mere functions of a company's earnings.

There are price appreciation, income AND VOLATILITY based sources of total returns.

Two assets each individually broadly compound 0% real, with inverse correlations that have one down -20% the other up +25% in alternations 50/50 rebalanced yields a +5% reward.

Conceptually they (price/income/volatility rewards) should all broadly compare, otherwise investors would converge into the consistently more rewarding choice. in practice they cycle and diversifying across all three tends to lower overall portfolio volatility = better risk adjusted reward.

Charlottesquare
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1775
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:22 pm
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 560 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434180

Postby Charlottesquare » August 11th, 2021, 8:31 pm

1nvest wrote:
Charlottesquare wrote:Having read a fair way through this thread it seems to me there is a lot of discussion of dividends/total return that really misses the point, all longer term returns, whether via share price movement or returned dividends, are really, when run to eternity, mere functions of a company's earnings.

There are price appreciation, income AND VOLATILITY based sources of total returns.

Two assets each individually broadly compound 0% real, with inverse correlations that have one down -20% the other up +25% in alternations 50/50 rebalanced yields a +5% reward.

Conceptually they (price/income/volatility rewards) should all broadly compare, otherwise investors would converge into the consistently more rewarding choice. in practice they cycle and diversifying across all three tends to lower overall portfolio volatility = better risk adjusted reward.


However returns manifest themselves they all really arise from earnings, markets have their up and down flurries of price based on what the market forecasts these forward earnings will be, but eventually real, actual earnings will determine a share's price.

My point is that being a convert to High Yield or to any other form of equity investment is merely a punt on future earnings expectations and whether the company pays out these earnings or retains them is often not that significant (provided the company's returns on capital, debt servicing costs and dividend yields are all roughly in the same ballpark and that frictional tax costs do not distort company/investor investment decision making.)

Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6032
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1398 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434196

Postby Alaric » August 11th, 2021, 9:30 pm

Charlottesquare wrote:My point is more that a share's current value may be looked at as the discounted sum of all cashflows it will ever make to its shareholders, the only difference viewing a single company that pays or does not pay dividends is comparing getting x every year for 100 years and getting y in a hundred years time, this difference is the difference between x and y discounted for time value, how well the company used the retained earnings (its ROCE) and if dividends are enjoyed what is the tax cost or tax benefit of receiving the income now as opposed to later?


It's also possible for investors to take a more bond like view. What's the dividend payment over the investment period and what will the selling price be when disinvesting at the end of the period?

Charlottesquare
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1775
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:22 pm
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 560 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434216

Postby Charlottesquare » August 11th, 2021, 10:55 pm

Alaric wrote:
Charlottesquare wrote:My point is more that a share's current value may be looked at as the discounted sum of all cashflows it will ever make to its shareholders, the only difference viewing a single company that pays or does not pay dividends is comparing getting x every year for 100 years and getting y in a hundred years time, this difference is the difference between x and y discounted for time value, how well the company used the retained earnings (its ROCE) and if dividends are enjoyed what is the tax cost or tax benefit of receiving the income now as opposed to later?


It's also possible for investors to take a more bond like view. What's the dividend payment over the investment period and what will the selling price be when disinvesting at the end of the period?


Gross redemption yield in effect.

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434446

Postby dealtn » August 12th, 2021, 9:29 pm

Charlottesquare wrote:
To me competing returns are nothing to do with the dividends and everything to do with company ROCE and frictional extraction costs yet we see few discussions on here re ROCE and dividends which do imho actually impact total return.



Excellent summary.

The investor income "tail" wags the company earnings "dog" for the majority of people it seems. It's not for the want of trying that such views and discussions on them are rare here (and generally).

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4323
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 680 times
Been thanked: 1316 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434834

Postby 1nvest » August 15th, 2021, 3:46 am

mickeypops wrote:For those of us requiring an income from our investments, the main alternative to a dividend harvesting approach would be some kind of safe withdrawal rate system, or one of its many variations.

Not forgetting the other alternative ... won the game so take risk off the table i.e. bonds. Maybe someone who lives in a £750K home and has £700K of investments/savings. If at 60 years old they start receiving a occupational pension of £16K at which time they 'retire'; Will receive another £9K state pension starting at age 67; Own their own home so no rent to find/pay and that might serve as late life care costs cover; Smokes/drinks so anticipates being lucky if they get to age 85; Spends £30K/year; ... Then £200K into bonds earning 0% real would cover them (assuming inflation linked occupational pension). With negative real yields at present ... add some to cover that, but at other times it might swing the other way around so if in short dated bonds that mature and roll relatively regularly potentially into higher/positive real yields during those retirement years it might all wash.

If two kids and would like to leave them £1M each including the home value i.e. if die without having had to sell the home to fund care, then over near 20 years the additional £500K of 'surplus' capital initially dropped into stocks/accumulation and left to grow for around 20 years potentially provides that. Or covers shortfall/longevity insurance/reserves.

Starts with near 70/30 stock/bonds, ends with all of bonds having been spent at 100/0 stock/bonds, averages 85/15 stock/bonds. Relatively aggressive, but where the income objective is relatively safe. Early years sequence of returns risk is mitigated, regular/consistent inflation adjusted income is potentially reliable/safe.

That's quite a popular way. More often with relatively lower initial stock/bond weightings, more like 30/70 stock/bonds that after n years when all of bonds have been spent ends at 100/0 so averages 65/35 overall. A form of time cost-averaging into stocks that substantially reduces early years sequence of returns risks.

TUK020
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2039
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 7:41 am
Has thanked: 762 times
Been thanked: 1175 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434850

Postby TUK020 » August 15th, 2021, 9:32 am

1nvest wrote:
mickeypops wrote:For those of us requiring an income from our investments, the main alternative to a dividend harvesting approach would be some kind of safe withdrawal rate system, or one of its many variations.

Not forgetting the other alternative ... won the game so take risk off the table i.e. bonds. Maybe someone who lives in a £750K home and has £700K of investments/savings. If at 60 years old they start receiving a occupational pension of £16K at which time they 'retire'; Will receive another £9K state pension starting at age 67; Own their own home so no rent to find/pay and that might serve as late life care costs cover; Smokes/drinks so anticipates being lucky if they get to age 85; Spends £30K/year; ... Then £200K into bonds earning 0% real would cover them (assuming inflation linked occupational pension). With negative real yields at present ... add some to cover that, but at other times it might swing the other way around so if in short dated bonds that mature and roll relatively regularly potentially into higher/positive real yields during those retirement years it might all wash.

If two kids and would like to leave them £1M each including the home value i.e. if die without having had to sell the home to fund care, then over near 20 years the additional £500K of 'surplus' capital initially dropped into stocks/accumulation and left to grow for around 20 years potentially provides that. Or covers shortfall/longevity insurance/reserves.

Starts with near 70/30 stock/bonds, ends with all of bonds having been spent at 100/0 stock/bonds, averages 85/15 stock/bonds. Relatively aggressive, but where the income objective is relatively safe. Early years sequence of returns risk is mitigated, regular/consistent inflation adjusted income is potentially reliable/safe.

That's quite a popular way. More often with relatively lower initial stock/bond weightings, more like 30/70 stock/bonds that after n years when all of bonds have been spent ends at 100/0 so averages 65/35 overall. A form of time cost-averaging into stocks that substantially reduces early years sequence of returns risks.

This is actually more conservative than it first appears.
You can count the occupational pension & state pension as income from bonds.
On this basis, the % in equity is actually pretty low

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4323
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 680 times
Been thanked: 1316 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434901

Postby 1nvest » August 15th, 2021, 1:18 pm

TUK020 wrote:This is actually more conservative than it first appears.
You can count the occupational pension & state pension as income from bonds.
On this basis, the % in equity is actually pretty low

But you could also count home/house value as 'equity', house price change comparable to stock price change, plus imputed rent as the 'dividend'.

scrumpyjack
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4811
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:15 am
Has thanked: 605 times
Been thanked: 2675 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434909

Postby scrumpyjack » August 15th, 2021, 2:00 pm

Not sure about this whole concept of ‘taking income’. I’m assuming that if one has investments and is retired, one does keep a cash buffer. So what is important is to budget what it is sustainable to spend long term in the context of your overall means and to ensure there is a reasonable cash buffer on a continuing basis. To me it seems better not to be too focused on how much ‘income’ there is in a particular period. It is cash that pays the bills.

If the cash buffer is falling you can choose whether to let it fall because you think the current reduction in cash flow from dividends, interest, pensions etc is transient or whether to top it up by realising some assets.

I suppose ‘income’ becomes more important if you only have a month or two’s cash reserve, but if the reserve is larger, better just to focus on living within your overall means.

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4323
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 680 times
Been thanked: 1316 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#434910

Postby 1nvest » August 15th, 2021, 2:04 pm

1nvest wrote:
TUK020 wrote:This is actually more conservative than it first appears.
You can count the occupational pension & state pension as income from bonds.
On this basis, the % in equity is actually pretty low

But you could also count home/house value as 'equity', house price change comparable to stock price change, plus imputed rent as the 'dividend'.

Another factor is would you hold all of drawdown cash in cash deposits/short dated gilts? Even such 'safe' holding have at times lost near 50% in real terms. States might do something weird such as print money to buy bonds and keep the yields suppressed whilst inflation (which might be considered a form of taxation) eats away at the purchase power.

Some go for inflation bonds, maybe a liability matched ladder of index linked gilts that each year mature with the amount of anticipated spending in that year. But there are insufficient ILG's to do that, and present real yields means you have to put in perhaps 12K to buy a 10K of years income in x years time.

Another alternative is to third each in US stock, UK gilts, gold (that link is US data), three currencies (US$/£/global currency (gold)), three assets (stock/bond/commodity). Which expands the amount of overall stock exposure across the total portfolio. One of those assets will do well, another likely poorly, but collectively the good-un outweighs the bad-un and the collective volatility is relatively low whilst better covering drawdown (lower risk than all-bonds alone). A better prospect for not only covering x years of drawdown, but also potentially seeing sufficient growth to last longer/leave-more. 2000 was a bad year to start a SWR applied to all-stock, for stock/cash/gold however with a 5% SWR In that case, a 2000 65 year old that had anticipated living 20 years and was drawing 5% SWR, from all stock or all cash deposits (TBills) that would have lasted out to 2018 whilst stock/cash/gold still had at that time over 50% of the inflation adjusted start date amount still intact/available.

Personally I think the approach of ... own a home so 'rent' is liability matched (you are both landlord and tenant and don't have to worry about rents soaring or collapsing) - that also serves as late life care insurance; Enough in 'safe' for drawdown, ideally alongside inflation adjusted state and occupational pensions, where 'safe' = 33.3% each US stock/gold/cash-deposits (or short dated gilts if substantial amounts, as they're fully protected rather than £85K/whatever deposit protection limited); The rest in stock/accumulation, for heirs and longevity 'risk' insurance.

Here's the same 'safe' with 5% SWR started in 1972, prior to raging inflation. Romped safely home.

However here's another 'safe' with 5% started in 1980, when gold had spiked very high, and stocks were deeply down, 1 ounce of gold bought a Dow stock index share compared to for instance in 1999 when it took 40 ounces per share. In that case cash would have been slightly better (stock/gold/cash exhausted in 2008), conceptually, but factor in high taxation rates that were applied to cash back in the 1970's and perhaps the gap might have narrowed/reversed. Also in the way of compensation the all-stock 'growth' portfolio would have performed well such that longevity was covered.

OhNoNotimAgain
Lemon Slice
Posts: 767
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:51 am
Has thanked: 71 times
Been thanked: 147 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#464928

Postby OhNoNotimAgain » December 11th, 2021, 9:26 am

The 2021 Barclays Equity Gilt study says this in relation to UK equities:

Figure 9 and Figure 10 show how reinvestment of income affects the performance of the various
asset classes. Figure 9 shows £100 invested at the end of 1899 without reinvesting income; the
second is with reinvestment. £100 invested in equities at the end of 1899 would be worth just
£167 in real terms without the reinvestment of dividend income; however, with reinvestment,
the portfolio would have grown to £32,025.

seagles
Lemon Slice
Posts: 490
Joined: August 19th, 2017, 8:37 am
Has thanked: 153 times
Been thanked: 235 times

Re: Different ways of taking income

#464937

Postby seagles » December 11th, 2021, 10:10 am

OhNoNotimAgain wrote:The 2021 Barclays Equity Gilt study says this in relation to UK equities:

Figure 9 and Figure 10 show how reinvestment of income affects the performance of the various
asset classes. Figure 9 shows £100 invested at the end of 1899 without reinvesting income; the
second is with reinvestment. £100 invested in equities at the end of 1899 would be worth just
£167 in real terms without the reinvestment of dividend income; however, with reinvestment,
the portfolio would have grown to £32,025.


Seems to be only available behind Barclays Live firewall?


Return to “High Yield Shares & Strategies - General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests