The Lemon Fool

https://www.ft.com/content/3a80d337-cd0 ... 7e08720669

Recent article “My dividend strategy continues to deliver” interesting article and his weighted portfolio choices.

Behind a paywall but a google search of the article title normally delivers a free to read version.

Hariseldon58 wrote:
Recent article “My dividend strategy continues to deliver” interesting article and his weighted portfolio choices.

Behind a paywall but a google search of the article title normally delivers a free to read version.

Thanks - link here to an accessible version of the article -

https://archive.ph/zt5uB

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Itsallaguess wrote:

Hariseldon58 wrote:
Recent article “My dividend strategy continues to deliver” interesting article and his weighted portfolio choices.

Behind a paywall but a google search of the article title normally delivers a free to read version.

Thanks - link here to an accessible version of the article -

https://archive.ph/zt5uB

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Thanks that's very much worth a read.

I can't seem to get past the captcha - anyone else had the same?

I read this a few days ago, when it first came out. I always read his columns, even though there's often a small-cap focus.

Strongly recommended.

MDW1954

moorfield wrote:I can't seem to get past the captcha - anyone else had the same?

does this help https://www-ft-com.ezproxy.brunel.ac.uk ... 7e08720669 ?

moorfield wrote:I can't seem to get past the captcha - anyone else had the same?

Intermittently. However at least I am not locked out (for long anyway)

Dod

There is no denying that Lord Lee has been a great investor but there is nothing very much that we income investors did not know in this article. In fact, most of us will hold most of the shares he mentions.

Not high yield, but I have not yet forgiven him for highlighting Treatt, which has been a disaster for me, Fortunately only a small holding.

Dod

squareofthewicket wrote:

moorfield wrote:I can't seem to get past the captcha - anyone else had the same?

does this help https://www-ft-com.ezproxy.brunel.ac.uk ... 7e08720669 ?

Super, thank you.

First impression - another article, like pyad's originals, that does not also examine investment trusts and explain why they might not be suitable for the target readership.

After all, Lord Lee writes

I have always been a lover of dividends — reinvested and compounded

and

I like businesses in which I’m invested to at least maintain dividend rates in a difficult period, if at all possible,

and

I relished the recent opportunity to advise and build a conservative, income-focused portfolio

and

This portfolio should deliver a near 8 per cent dividend yield overall. Even if a couple of holdings were to disappoint, the projected income should still be very satisfying

I haven't learnt a lot from this article tbh. I would be much more interested in whether Lord Lee thinks investment trusts square with his sentiments expressed here or not, and if not, why not.

moorfield wrote: I would be much more interested in whether Lord Lee thinks investment trusts square with his sentiments expressed here or not, and if not, why not.

He enjoys investing, but does say if you don't, have others do it for you like ITs.
https://youtu.be/G84qShNiAAo?t=802

I read the post this morning regarding Sir John Lee's article in the FT. I was particularly interested to see he's adding LGEN . Like other Lemons, I'm trying to understand the poor shareprice performance of a company which delivers good financial results, an increasing annual dividend (with kudos in particular regarding both it's ability and willingness to rail against the PRA's Covid divi death cull mandate ).

I thought I'd turn to the experts when it comes to dividends....the professional managers of investment trusts , those that have a bias towards UK equities.
Just this morning I was looking at investment trusts ( many being in the AIC's Dividend Heroes listing) to see what percentage of their holdings they had in LGEN. I downloaded the annual reports from the AIC website - (figures are percentages).

CTY 1.9
MRCH 1.7
* EDIN 0.0
DIG 0.0
AEI 1.7
JCH 2.1
LWDB 0.0
MRC 0.0
MUT 0.0
ATY 0.0
* SCF 2.1
* SDV 0.0
CHI 1.8
FSV 1.8 (long CFD)
LWI 0.9
HOT 0.8
HHI 0.0
(The ITs are mentioned in the AIC's Dividend Heroes. list unless indicated to the contrary by a * ).

The so called "Dividend Heroes " don't seem very keen on LGEN which I find somewhat puzzling when ones looks at some of the iffy (imho) holdings they do own)'. I wonder what they see that puts them off? I was surprised by the low percentage holdings, often zero, in these income focused UK equity investment trusts.





("Iffy" ...translation: including but not limited to : serial dividend cutters, low yield, less than FTSE100 running yield, low dividend CAGR, stuff that you think is a punt).

monabri wrote:
Just this morning I was looking at investment trusts (many being in the AIC's Dividend Heroes listing) to see what percentage of their holdings they had in LGEN.

As an aside on that interesting look at LGEN percentage-holdings in various AIC-listed IT's, it's been a vague idea of mine to maybe do a deeper dive than that, and perhaps look to pull out some granular information regarding top-10 holdings and perhaps even geographical-splits on a chunk of IT's, and see if it's something that might be possible to pull together with a bit of scraping code.

I'll probably start with a mid-size AIC sector and then we'll see how it goes from there, and perhaps the UK Equity Income sector might be a good challenging opener perhaps.

Probably something for the winter period if it happens, but I thought I'd mention it given that you've done something similar for LGEN here.

Watch this space...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Itsallaguess wrote:it's been a vague idea of mine to maybe do a deeper dive than that, and perhaps look to pull out some granular information regarding top-10 holdings

Watch this space...

Yes I've thought from time to time to attempt this, definitely a job for Jan/Feb winter nights when you are at a loose end, and I suspect you'll have to do it the hard way - manually. I'd suggest to begin with you limit yourself to UK Equity funds and maybe only the top 5 of each. The 5 most common that you'll end up with, I'll wager now, will be something like: SHEL, HSBA, AZN, ULVR and BATS. Extend it to 15 and you'll have yourself a pretty good looking HYP. Which might make folk begin to wonder...

kempiejon wrote:

moorfield wrote: I would be much more interested in whether Lord Lee thinks investment trusts square with his sentiments expressed here or not, and if not, why not.

He enjoys investing, but does say if you don't, have others do it for you like ITs.
https://youtu.be/G84qShNiAAo?t=802

Fair enough, if you enjoy it. What he hasn't said there and perhaps ought to, for balance, is that "others" ie. IT managers have, on the average, less of a propensity to f__k up than DIY investors.
- for example dig a little over on HYP Practical and you'll find some horror story decision making soon enough.

I have been listening to Money Makers podcast for some time now.
The most consistent theme is the public school phrasing and accent of interviewees who run Investment Trusts.
When a female (rare) Manc (unicorn virtually) turned up once it genuinely came as a shock.
There are only so many schools this lot could have gone to.
Maybe some here went as well, but those who didn't (me, obviously) may not have the same.... lets call it insight.

W.

I often wonder why Hedley Walter Comprehensive Skool, Brentwood never seems to get a mention in quality financial circles.

moorfield wrote:
- for example dig a little over on HYP Practical and you'll find some horror story decision making soon enough.

Really, can you link to one? I'm not aware of any HYP that has done worse than the index it has been taken from let alone merit the term 'horror story'. Obviously there have been some individual share selections that have done terribly but that's to be expected for any diversified portfolio unless the investor is either very lucky or owns a functioning crystal ball.

BoE

Bubblesofearth wrote:

moorfield wrote:for example dig a little over on HYP Practical and you'll find some horror story decision making soon enough.

Really, can you link to one? I'm not aware of any HYP that has done worse than the index it has been taken from let alone merit the term 'horror story'. Obviously there have been some individual share selections that have done terribly but that's to be expected for any diversified portfolio unless the investor is either very lucky or owns a functioning crystal ball.

I suspect that those with HYPs that have done well stick around and report that. Those whose HYPs did badly may keep quiet or even go away. So finding a link to poor ones might be hard. Survivorship bias.

I suspect that many HYPs have performed close to the index, since the names in them are typically the biggest names in the index anyway. The real problem has been the FTSE-100 itself, which has done nothing since 1999, other than dividends.

Since the low of the global financial crisis the FTSE-100 has about doubled from 3,800 or so. The S&P 500 is up nearly seven-fold in the same time, from 666 to around 4,500. If you are fishing in a pond with very few fish, you won't do as well regardless of your skill level.

Bubblesofearth wrote:Really, can you link to one? I'm not aware of any HYP that has done worse than the index it has been taken from

I'm not permitted to post to that place, and as a consequence rarely visit. However I'm not aware of many portfolios that reference a measured relative total return performance against a suitable index anywhere on this site. It's not surprising you aren't aware of any that have done worse. I suspect the same is broadly true of many that outperform one either. (And that's before investigating the obvious biases, survivor, confirmation etc.)

Lootman wrote:
I suspect that many HYPs have performed close to the index, since the names in them are typically the biggest names in the index anyway. The real problem has been the FTSE-100 itself, which has done nothing since 1999, other than dividends.

Since the low of the global financial crisis the FTSE-100 has about doubled from 3,800 or so. The S&P 500 is up nearly seven-fold in the same time, from 666 to around 4,500. If you are fishing in a pond with very few fish, you won't do as well regardless of your skill level.

But you are not comparing the same thing. You are comparing dividend income v growth. Your argument would be more persuasive if you compared dividend growth in the FTSE-100 v S&P 500.

Crazbe7