Multiples based on Fundamentals - the Justified P/E ratio

A price multiple may be related to fundamentals through a dividend discount model such as the Gordon growth model.

The expressions developed in such an exercise are interpreted as the justified (or based on fundamental) values for a multiple.


The justified P/E Ratio:

P/E = D/E/(r-g)

r = required rate of return
g = growth


Gordon Growth Model

r = D/P + g
D/P = r-g
P= D/(r-g)
P/E = D/E(r-g)
P/E = Dividend Payout Ratio / (r-g)



Inference

The P/E ratio is inversely related to the required rate of return.
The P/E ratio is positively related to the growth rate.
The P/E ratio appears to be positively related to the dividend payout ratio.

• However, this relationship may not always hold because a higher dividend payout ratio implies that the company's earnings retention ratio is lower.  
• A lower earnings retention ratio translates into a lower growth rate.  
• This is known as the "dividend displacement" of earnings.

Notes:

Higher the growth rate (g), higher the P/E.
Higher the required rate of return (r), lower the P/E.
Higher the DPO ratio, higher the P/E.
Also, higher the DPO ratio, lower the retained earnings,  leading to lower growth rate (g), thus lower P/E. ("dividend displacement" of earnings)

Four Signs of Dividend Safety (Morningstar)

Corporate Finance - Dividend Growth Rate and the Effect of Changing Dividend Policy

Signaling An Earning's Forecast Through Changes in Dividend PolicyMuch like a company can signal the state of its operations through its use of capital-financing projects, management can also signal its company's earnings forecast through changes in its dividend policy. 

Dividends are paid out when a company satisfies its internal needs for cash. If a company cuts its dividends, stockholders may become worried that the company is not generating enough earnings to satisfy its internal needs for cash as well as pay out its current dividend. A stock may decline in this instance. 

Suppose for example Newco decides to cuts its dividend to $0.25 per share from its initial value of $0.50 per share. How would this be perceived by investors?

Most likely the cut in dividend by Newco would be perceived negatively by investors. Investors would assume that the company is beginning to go through some tough times and the company is trying to preserve cash. This would indicate that the business may be slowing or earnings are not growing at the rate it once had. 

To learn more about dividends, please read: The Importance of Dividends

The Clientele Effect.A company's change in dividend policy may impact in the company's stock price given changes in the "clientele" interested in owning the company's stock. Depending on their personal tax situation, some stockholders may prefer capital gains over dividends and vice versa as capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than dividends. The clientele effect is simply different stockholders' preference on receiving dividends compared to capital gains.

For example, a stockholder in a high tax bracket may favor stocks with low dividend payouts compared to a stockholder in a low tax-bracket who may favor stocks with higher dividend payouts.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/exam-guide/cfa-level-1/corporate-finance/dividend-growth-changing-dividend-policy-effects.asp#ixzz1yf633Zet

Corporate Finance - Dividend Theories

Dividend Irrelevance TheoryMuch like their work on the capital-structure irrelevance proposition, Modigliani and Miller also theorized that, with no taxes or bankruptcy costs, dividend policy is also irrelevant. This is known as the "dividend-irrelevance theory", indicating that there is no effect from dividends on a company's capital structure or stock price. 

MM's dividend-irrelevance theory says that investors can affect their return on a stock regardless of the stock's dividend. For example, suppose, from an investor's perspective, that a company's dividend is too big. That investor could then buy more stock with the dividend that is over the investor's expectations. Likewise, if, from an investor's perspective, a company's dividend is too small, an investor could sell some of the company's stock to replicate the cash flow he or she expected. As such, the dividend is irrelevant to investors, meaning investors care little about a company's dividend policy since they can simulate their own.

Bird-in-the-Hand TheoryThe bird-in-the-hand theory, however, states that dividends are relevant. Remember that total return (k) is equal to dividend yield plus capital gains. Myron Gordon and John Lintner (Gordon/Litner) took this equation and assumed that k would decrease as a company's payout increased. As such, as a company increases its payout ratio, investors become concerned that the company's future capital gains will dissipate since the retained earnings that the company reinvests into the business will be less. 

Gordon and Lintner argued that investors value dividends more than capital gains when making decisions related to stocks. The bird-in-the-hand may sound familiar as it is taken from an old saying: "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." In this theory "the bird in the hand' is referring to dividends and "the bush" is referring to capital gains.

Tax-Preference TheoryTaxes are important considerations for investors. Remember capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than dividends. As such, investors may prefer capital gains to dividends. This is known as the "tax Preference theory". 

Additionally, capital gains are not paid until an investment is actually sold. Investors can control when capital gains are realized, but, they can't control dividend payments, over which the related company has control. 

Capital gains are also not realized in an estate situation. For example, suppose an investor purchased a stock in a company 50 years ago. The investor held the stock until his or her death, when it is passed on to an heir. That heir does not have to pay taxes on that stock's appreciation. 

The Dividend-Irrelevance Theory and Company ValuationIn the determination of the value of a company, dividends are often used. However, MM's dividend-irrelevance theory indicates that there is no effect from dividends on a company's capital structure or stock price. 

MM's dividend-irrelevance theory says that investors can affect their return on a stock regardless of the stock's dividend. 

For example, suppose, from an investor's perspective, that a company's dividend is too big. That investor could then buy more stock with the dividend that is over his or her expectations. Likewise, if, from an investor's perspective, a company's dividend is too small, an investor could sell some of the company's stock to replicate the cash flow he or she expected. As such, the dividend is irrelevant to investors, meaning investors care little about a company's dividend policy since they can simulate their own. 

The Principal Conclusion for Dividend Policy

The dividend-irrelevance theory, recall, with no taxes or bankruptcy costs, assumes that a company's dividend policy is irrelevant. The dividend-irrelevance theory indicates that there is no effect from dividends on a company's capital structure or stock price. 

MM's dividend-irrelevance theory assumes that investors can affect their return on a stock regardless of the stock's dividend. As such, the dividend is irrelevant to an investor, meaning investors care little about a company's dividend policy when making their purchasing decision since they can simulate their own dividend policy.

How Any Shareholder Can Construct His or Her Own Dividend Policy.

Recall that the MM's dividend-irrelevance theory says that investors can affect their return on a stock regardless of the stock's dividend. As a result, a stockholder can construct his or her own dividend policy. 

• Suppose, from an investor's perspective, that a company's dividend is too big. That investor could then buy more stock with the dividend that is over the investor's expectations.
• Likewise, if, from an investor's perspective, a company's dividend is too small, an investor can sell some of the company's stock to replicate the cash flow the investor expected.

As such, the dividend is irrelevant to an investor, meaning investors care little about a company's dividend policy since they can simulate their own.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/exam-guide/cfa-level-1/corporate-finance/dividend-theories.asp#ixzz1yf1Ugmp6

Dividend Policy - Don't Piss Off your Shareholders

View more PowerPoint from Amit Dodwani

Divine Dividends

Dividends represent nothing more than the investor's share of earnings that will be received immediately (rather than through reinvestment and future growth of the stock).

Dividends are one of the quickest and healthiest ways that earnings can make their way into shareholders' pockets.

Graham argued that intelligent investors would rather have dividends in their pockets (even if investors use them to buy more of the same stock) than risk waiting for possible future growth.  Furthermore, he insisted, it is management's responsibility to pay dividends.

For long-term investors who follow a "buy and hold" strategy, dividends are the only way to collect on investment gains.

In addition to representing money in the bank, dividends are, to many investors, a reliable indicator of future growth.  

Values are determined roughly by earnings available for dividends.  This relation among earnings, dividends and values survives.

A long history of dividend payments and regular dividend increases also indicates a substantial company with limited risk.  

Additionally, a rise in the dividend is tangible confirmation of the confidence of management in good times ahead.  A cut in the dividend is a red flag indicating trouble on the track.

Not all corporate income need be paid in dividends.  Depending on the industry and how much capital is required to keep the business growing, the appropriate payout may be as much as 80% or as little as 50% of net earnings.  

When studying the dividend payout of a company, calculate both average earnings and average dividends over a 10-year period.  From those two averages you can determine the average payout.  

Earnings fluctuate, but dividends tend to remain stable or,  in the best companies, to rise gradually.


One way of determining if a stock is overvalued or undervalued is to compare its dividend yield with that of similar companies.

• Safety, growth, and other factors being equal, the stock with the highest dividend and the lowest share price is the best bargain.
• As a further check of value, investors should compare the stock's dividend yield with that of the whole stock market dividend yield.

Rationale for Withholding Dividends

If a company isn't paying dividends it should, like Berkshire Hathaway, be doing something profitable with its earnings.  

It is acceptable to withhold dividends for the following reasons:

• To strengthen the company's working capital
• To increase productive capacity
• To reduce debt.

Graham contended that when corporate management is stingy with dividends or withholds them altogether, it is sometimes for self-serving reasons.  It is easier to keep the cash on hand to bail management out of bad times or bad decisions.  Sometimes the dividend policy is simply a reflection of the tax status of management and large investors - they don't want the addition to their current taxable income.  Consequently, other investors get no income.

Dividends in Jeopardy

Dividends may be put in jeopardy in two ways:

• When a company's earnings per share is less than its dividend per share
• When debt is excessive.

A company's average earnings (over several years) should be sufficient to cover its average dividend.  Though earnings per share can fall below dividend per share from time to time with reserves making up the difference, the condition can persist for only so long.  

A company with substantial earnings rarely becomes insolvent because of bank loans.  But when a company is under pressure, lenders may require a suspension of dividends as a form of financial discipline.

QUICKIES: Seven investment myths you should not fall for

Text: Prerna Katiyar | ET Bureau

Pick this stock, it's trading at 52-week low.' 'That stock is a multi-bagger, trading at such a low PE.' 'Penny stocks make fortunes while stocks trading below book value are a sure pick for making quick bucks.'

Haven't we all heard such statements at some point in our lives? If you are one of those who believe in such assertions, read on. For, these are among the many myths in investing.



Here we list seven of them


Myth No 1: Stocks trading below book value are cheap

Book value (BV) is the actual worth of a stock as in a company's books/balance sheet, or the cost of an asset minus accumulated depreciation.

BV depends more on historical cost and depreciation and often has little correlation to the current share price.

Shares of industries that are capital intensive trade at lower price/ book ratios, as they generate lower earnings. On the other hand, those business models that have more human capital will fetch higher earnings and will trade at higher price/book ratios.

"Price/book (ratio) of below 1 may be cheap but one should see other aspects such as earnings forecast, guidance, management and debt on the books of the company ," says Angel Broking's equity derivatives head Siddarth Bhamre.


Myth No 2: Stocks trading at low P/E are under-valued

Price to earning ratio (P/E) is one of the most talked about ratios in the market. This is based on the theory that stocks with low P/Es are cheap.

However, P/E alone doesn't tell much about the stock price. P/E multiples may be a quick way to value a stock but one should look at this in correlation with expected growth earnings, the risk factors involved, company's performance and growth potential .

"This is surely a myth. It is also an indication of uncertain future earning of the stock concerned," says Birla Sunlife Mutual Fund CEO A Balasubramanian.

The idea behind dividing price with earnings is to create a levelplaying field where some kind of comparison can be made between high- and low-priced stocks.

Since P/E ratios vary across sectors, with growth stocks consistently trading at higher P/E, one can only compare the P/E ratio of a stock to the average P/E ratio of stocks in that sector.


Myth No. 3: Penny stocks make good fortunes

Penny stocks by nature are lowpriced , speculative and risky because of their limited liquidity, following and disclosure.

If it's easy to invest in penny stocks - as here you shell out much less money per share than you would require for a blue-chip firm - it's also easy to lose.

Says Bhamre, "Fortune can be made by high-denomination stocks also. Denomination has nothing to do with the rationale for picking a stock. Generally , retail investors are fond of stocks that are at sub- Rs 100 levels. But there may be stocks that may be trading in Rs 1,000-plus price but may well be cheap. Clarity on earnings is more important here. Anytime, I would be more comfortable buying an ICICI Bank (currently trading at Rs 1,038) than an IFCI at Rs 45. One should look at earnings visibility."


Myth No. 4: The worst is over in the stock market

Timing the market, a common strategy among investors, means forecasting and that should best be left to astrologers and tarot readers.

If one has done one's valuation studies, one shouldn't worry about timing the market. No one had predicted the bull run would take the Sensex from a level of 10,000 in February 2006 to over 21,000 in January 2008 - just as no one had any idea of the following crash, which saw the same index plummeting to 9,000 in March 2009.

"Timing the market is more of a gut feeling. It's more on the basis of perception, as there is no such thing (that the worst is over) when the future is uncertain. One can never surely time the market. The worst is over is more of a probability than a certainty. Timing the market is very difficult as market is driven not just by earnings but also by sentiments ," says Balasubramanian.


Myth No 5: Stocks that give high dividends are the best bet

This comes from the notion that regular dividends are extra income in the shareholder's hand. This may not always be true.

While a company may be making decent payouts every year, the share price appreciation may not be comparatively high. Before investing in companies paying high dividends, it's important to analyse if the company is reinvesting enough profit to grow its earnings consistently.

Says Brics Securities' research VP Sonam Udasi: "It's not dividend that matters but the yield. For eg, a company may pay a 100% or even a 300% dividend on a stock with face value of Rs 10.

So, the investor may receive Rs 10 or Rs 30 per share when the stock may be currently trading at Rs 800 or Rs 1000. This would translate into an yield of 1% or 3% only. Also, such companies may not necessarily be reinvesting their earnings in the business to generate future earnings and so there may be no stock movement. The dividend may be high but the EPS and growth per se may be constant."



Myth N0 6: Index stocks are the best stocks

If this was true, most investors would safely park their money in such stocks in anticipation of maximum profit without looking out for other value stocks.

Most indices are a collection of stocks with the highest market cap. Take, for eg, the Sensex.

Companies that make up the index are some of the largest, with stocks that are highly traded based on their free-float.

"Index stocks may not necessarily be the best stocks as they are mostly based on market-cap or free-float of the company and not earnings. This doesn't mean that all stocks of the Sensex are highearning stocks. One must take a stock-by-stock call," says Balasubramanian of Birla Sun Life Mutual Fund.

The stock price of a company depends on its earnings. One can find high-earning stocks outside the key indices as well, he says. The risk is certainly less with index stocks as they are well researched and leaders in their respective sectors, but, again, the margins may not be very high. So it's better to keep your eyes open to other stocks, too.



Myth No 7: Stocks trading at 52-week low are cheap

Says Udasi: "There may be a time in the economic cycle when a blue-chip stock may hit a 52-week low.

But the first thing that should come to one's mind is why did the stock hit the 52-week low.

There must be something fundamentally wrong with the stock if it has hit a 52-week low, and chances are they may hit a new 52-week low.

52-week low in itself guarantees nothing. If at all one is picking stocks at 52-week lows, they should have a long-term horizon so that when the economic cycle turns, the stock is able to recover."

Needless to say, quality matters most while buying any stock.


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/seven-investment-myths-you-should-not-fall-for/quickiearticleshow/9438662.cms

Calculate the Estimated Dividend Growth Rate for a Stock

As most investors know, mature companies tend to pay dividends, sending checks that represent a small fraction of the company’s profits to shareholders on a quarterly basis. While some investors prefer the volatility and excitement that often accompanies small-cap stock investing, the combination of capital gains through stock price appreciation along with income through dividends can be very attractive. Add to this the possibility of dividend growth and the case for investing in these more mature companies becomes quite compelling.

What is Dividend Growth Rate?

The dividend growth rate refers to the annual rate of growth that a stock offers over a period of time. A history of solid dividend growth can provide an indication that continued dividend growth is likely for that company into the future. As the dividend grows, shareholders can count on the stock price to rise because the more income it produces the more valuable the stock becomes- a scenario referred to as a “double dip”.

Watching the Dividend Payout Ratio

The dividend payout ratio is the proportion of company earnings that it allocates to paying dividends to shareholders. The ratio offers an indication as to how well company earnings support its dividend payments. In general, more mature companies offer higher payout ratios.

The formula for the dividend payout ratio can be written as:

Dividend Payout Ratio 

= Annual Dividend per Share / Earnings per Share

The key for shareholders is that, as long as the company maintains a constant dividend payout ratio as it grows, that payout ratio represents a continually growing amount.


Click Here for Dividend Payout Ratio Calculator

Estimating Dividend Growth Rates

It follows then that a company’s dividend growth rate can be estimated by projecting its earnings growth. In estimating the dividend growth rate, it is assumed that the return on equity and dividend payout ratio are held constant.

The formula to estimate the dividend growth rate can be written as:

Dividend Growth Rate 

= Plow Back Ratio x Return on Equity

The plow back ratio is simply (1- dividend payout ratio)




Bullbear Stock Investing Notes


http://www.stockresearchpro.com/calculate-the-estimated-dividend-growth-rate-for-a-stock

Stable dividend policy is followed by prudent management.

Stable dividend policy is followed by prudent management, as it enhances prestige and credit standing of the company and the shareholders also prefer such a policy, as it leads to stability in market prices of shares. Stable dividend means that a certain minimum amount of dividend is paid regularly. It may also mean that dividend is paid regularly by the company, but the amount or rate of dividend is not fixed. However, the former meaning is more acceptable. The stable dividend may take the following forms:

(1) Fixed Amount of dividend per share.
(2) Fixed Share of Profit (Constant Pay out Ratio).
(3) Fixed Total Amount of dividend.
(4) Fixed Percentage of market price of shares.



Constant Pay-out Ratio




http://www.listedall.com/2010/02/stable-dividend-policy.html

High Dividend Payout Ratio = High Earnings Growth Rate (??)

I have always been under the impression that a dividend payout ratio must not be too high because it can limit the ability of the company to grow.  I look for a dividend payout ratios that are at least below 60%, preferably even lower.  I have selected this target because I have believed that the lower payout ratio will provide the company with a sizable chunk of earnings to grow the business and with a lower than 60% dividend payout ratio a company can continue to grow its dividend even during time of economic slowdowns or reduced earnings.

It appears that this theory and fundamental analysis principle has been refuted in a study by Robert D. Arnott and Clifford S. Asness (pdf document). Their theory is that higher dividend payouts actually have lead to higher earnings growth. And with higher earnings growth, share prices tend to go up over time which is better for all of us investors. Let’s have a look at their research and findings.

But First a Definition of the Payout Ratio


The payout ratio is the percentage of a company’s earnings that are paid out as dividends. In a nutshell, the payout ratio provides an idea of how well earnings support the dividend payments. More mature companies tend to have a higher payout ratio.

The crux of the Arnott and Asness research really boils down to one chart. Have a look and it is clear that there is a trend happening here.



As you can see, for a high number of companies, the higher the payout ratio is the better earnings growth the companies experienced. Here are some comments from the authors:

• In general, when starting from very low payout ratios, the equity market has delivered dismal real earnings growth over the next decade; growth has actually fallen 0.4 percent a year on average–ranging from a worst case of truly terrible –3.4 percent compounded annual real earnings for the next 10 years to a best case of only 3.2 percent real growth a year over the next decade. 
• From a starting point of very high payout ratios, the opposite has occurred: strong average real growth (4.2 percent), a worst case of positive 0.6 percent, and a maximum that is a spectacular 11.0 percent real growth a year for 10 years.

So what do we, the average investors do with this data?

My view is that I am going to continue to use my 60% payout ratio benchmark, but will not scoff at a higher dividend payout ratio as quickly. I still believe that it is the average historical payout ratio that an investor must be concerned with – any recent jumps in the payout ratio need to be examined to determine why the change occurred.

http://www.thedividendguyblog.com/high-dividend-payout-ratio-high-earnings-growth-rate/

But, do read the article below which contradicts the above findings.

----

High Yields and Low Payout Ratios

The above post has covered high dividend stocks and the fact that they have been better market performers than low yield stocks. However, it has not been simply buying all the high dividend stocks that has been the most powerful. A study conducted by Credit Suisse Quantitative Equity Research looked at high yields and payout ratios. Their study found that it is high yields coupled with low payout ratios that have provided the best gains over lower yield investing. Although the study used a shorter time frame (1980 – 2006) than many of the other studies we have looked at, the data is pretty clear in its messaging. Take a look at the chart below:



It is interesting to see that the stocks that had a high payout ratio as a whole produced worse gains than the S&P 500, but the stocks that either paid no dividends, had a low yield, or had a high yield did better than the S&P 500. That payout ratio is certainly more important than I thought it was based on this study. A high payout ratio can certain indicate trouble in a company and must be watched closely.

http://www.thedividendguyblog.com/day-5-the-dividend-key-high-yields-and-low-payout-ratios/

Earnings, Dividends and Payout Ratio: Earnings don’t grow at a constant rate. Dividends are more stable than earnings. Payout ratio varies over time.

Dividends are more stable than earnings, so the payout ratio certainly varies over time. Additionally, corporations have shown less willingness to pay dividends, and investors have shown less inclination to demand dividends, to the payout ratio today is roughly half of what it was in the early 60s.

Earnings don’t grow at a constant rate, either. Over the last 53 years, earnings have grown at a 6.7% rate, but that has included times of shrinkage, and boom times as well.




http://alephblog.com/2007/07/09/the-fed-model/

Retention Rate Is Important Factor For Dividend Growth Companies

Investing in a company that simply increases it dividend will not ensure an investor that the investment will yield higher returns. One factor to evaluate is the earnings retention rate. Retention rate is the amount of earnings left over after accounting for the dividends paid to shareholders. If a company pays all earnings to shareholders, then the earnings retention would be zero. If a company pays out 70% of its earnings to shareholders, then the company's retention rate would equal 30%.

The table below shows the average retention and dividend growth rates over the past ten and five years for a number of companies we have recommended. As can be seen, since 1999 these companies, as a group, had an average retention rate of 17%, or more than four times the average of the S&P 500 for the same period. Their average dividend growth rates for the past five years were also far superior to the S&P 500 -- even taking into account the three companies in the group not paying dividends for the entire period.



http://disciplinedinvesting.blogspot.com/2009/05/retention-rate-is-important-factor-for.html

Do Dividend Plays Pay?

PERSPECTIVE | 12 MARCH 2010

Do Dividend Plays Pay?

By Aw Jie Sheng  

Dividends matter and they matter a lot! Had you bought Singapore Post at the start of 2005 and held it till the end of February this year, inclusive of dividends, it would have compounded at 9.4% over the 5 odd years, against the Straits Times Index’s 5.6%.

During that time frame, Singapore Post’s management had been very generous, rewarding a total $0.357 per share to its shareholders. Stripped of those distributions, Singapore Post would have lagged the market badly, compounding at only a paltry 3.4%.

This is not a case of cherry picking. In fact, a recent Citi Investment Research report noted that in the past 10 years, equities in Asia ex-Japan have generated a compounded total return of 5.9% per annum in US dollar terms, 46% of which came from dividends.

Dividend Matters


Some formulae are in order before proceeding further. Dividend yield, the most basic metric, is calculated by dividing total dividend per share paid out during a full financial year over the stock’s current market price.

Dividend payout ratio (DPR) is more instructive as yield tends to fluctuate depending on the time of the day. This is calculated by dividing total dividend per share paid out during a full financial year over that respective year’s earnings per share (EPS).

Singapore Post, for example, paid out a total of 6.25 cents in dividends per share, when EPS was 7.7 cents in FY09. Be sure to exclude special dividends as they are one-off. Dividend payout ratio works out to about 0.8, which means 80% of FY09 profits were returned to shareholders. The importance of the dividend payout ratio will be elaborated later.

There are companies, particularly those of blue chip pedigree, that have a formal dividend policy stating the percentage of operating or net profit to be paid out. This can be found under the CEO/Chairman’s statement section of the annual report.

Even though a dividend policy is a legally binding commitment, companies that have one loathe changing it, as a downward revision or omission of dividends generally signals financial woes.

Finding Dividend Plays


To be able to consistently return profits to shareholders requires disciplined management as well as strong cash flow on the company’s side. These companies tend to be larger and/or more mature and are found mainly in the banking and finance, consumer staples, utilities and energy sectors.

Those that do have consistent and high dividend payout ratios – so called dividend plays – are likely past their growth phase. The stability in their earnings is generally accompanied by lower levels of R&D and capital expenditures. This is where we return to the dividend payout ratio.

Take the company’s return-on-equity (ROE) and multiply it by the earnings retention rate, which is one less the dividend payout ratio, and you will get the sustainable growth rate (SGR).

Again using Singapore Post as an example, based on FY09’s ROE of 59.2% and earnings retention rate of 18.8%, its sustainable growth rate works out to around 11.1%.

The sustainable growth rate is helpful in gauging whether a company’s growth plan is realistic based on its profits but it will not tell you whether a company has the opportunity to grow.

In this instance, if the opportunity exists and should Singapore Post want to grow its FY09 earnings by more than 11%, it would have to increase its net profit margins (this increases ROE) or fund future investments with debt or the issuance of new stock.

Books To Read


Modestly named “The Ultimate Dividend Playbook” by Josh Peters and “The Future for Investors” by Jeremy Siegel are great books to read for ideas and strategies on investing in dividend plays.

Peters’ book is very comprehensive and provides a detailed explanation on how to select and formulate a portfolio comprising of dividend plays, and the underlying mechanics. Be forewarned “The Ultimate Dividend Playbook” might be too textbook-ish for some and that it is focused mainly on American companies.

Siegel’s more readable account is a must-read for investors worried about the how the impending demographic age wave in developed world would impact future asset returns. While repeating his argument that common stocks are the best asset class in the long run, he highlights the importance of dividends and stock valuations as well as including international stocks in your portfolio.

For non-bookworms, the table below lists a few companies with a history of consistent dividend payments as well as relatively high yields. As usual, more research on the reader’s part should be done before investing.


*As of 10 MARCH 2010 Noon

http://www.sharesinv.com/articles/2010/03/12/dividends-pay/

Buffett (1984): 'Investments in bonds' and 'Corporate dividend policies'

We saw Warren Buffett put forth his views on the concept of 'economic goodwill' and why he prefers companies that have a high amount of the same. Let us now see what the master has to offer in terms of investment wisdom in his 1984 letter to the shareholders.

While Buffett has devoted a lot of space in his 84' letter to discussing in detail, some of Berkshire's biggest investments in those times, but as usual, the letter is not short on some general investment related counsel either. In a rather simplistic way that only he can, the master gives his opinion on a couple of extremely important topics like 'investments in bonds' and 'corporate dividend policies'. On the former, he has to say the following:

"Our approach to bond investment - treating it as an unusual sort of "business" with special advantages and disadvantages - may strike you as a bit quirky. However, we believe that many staggering errors by investors could have been avoided if they had viewed bond investment with a businessman's perspective. For example, in 1946, 20-year AAA tax-exempt bonds traded at slightly below a 1% yield. In effect, the buyer of those bonds at that time bought a "business" that earned about 1% on "book value" (and that, moreover, could never earn a dime more than 1% on book), and paid 100 cents on the dollar for that abominable business."

Berkshire Hathaway in 1984 had purchased huge quantities of bonds in a troubled company, where the yields had gone up to as much as 16%. While usually not a huge fan of long term bond investments, the master chose to invest in the troubled company because he felt that the risk was rather limited and not many businesses during those times gave as much return on the invested capital. Thus, despite the rather limited upside potential, he went ahead with his bond investments. This is further made clear in his following comment:

"This ceiling on upside potential is an important minus. It should be realized, however, that the great majority of operating businesses have a limited upside potential also unless more capital is continuously invested in them. That is so because most businesses are unable to significantly improve their average returns on equity - even under inflationary conditions, though these were once thought to automatically raise returns."

Years and years of studying companies had led the master to conclude that there are very few companies on the face of this earth that are able to continuously earn above average returns without consuming too much of capital. Indeed, such brutal are the competitive forces that sooner or later and in this case, more sooner than later that returns for majority of the companies tend to gravitate towards their cost of capital. If we do a similar study on our Sensex, we will too come to the conclusion that there are not many companies that were a part of the index 15 years back and are still a part of the same index. Hence, while valuing companies, having a fair judgement of when the competitive position of the company, the one that enables it to consistently earn above average returns is likely to deteriorate. This will help you to avoid paying too much for the company's future growth.

After touching upon the topic of bond investments, the master then gives his take on dividends and this is what he has to say:

"The first point to understand is that all earnings are not created equal. In many businesses particularly those that have high asset/profit ratios - inflation causes some or all of the reported earnings to become ersatz. The ersatz portion - let's call these earnings "restricted" - cannot, if the business is to retain its economic position, be distributed as dividends. Were these earnings to be paid out, the business would lose ground in one or more of the following areas:

•  its ability to maintain its unit volume of sales, 
• its long-term competitive position, 
• its financial strength. 

No matter how conservative its payout ratio, a company that consistently distributes restricted earnings is destined for oblivion unless equity capital is otherwise infused."

While the master is definitely in favour of dividend payments, he is also aware of the fact that not all companies have similar capital needs in order to maintain their ongoing level of operations.

• Hence, in cases where businesses have high capital needs, a high payout ratio is likely to result in deterioration of the business or sooner or later will require additional capital to be infused. 
• On the other hand, companies that have limited capital needs should distribute the remaining earnings as dividends and not pursue investments which drive down the overall returns of the underlying business. 
• In a nutshell, capital should go where it can be put to earn maximum rate of return.

He then goes on to add how his own textile company, Berkshire Hathaway, had huge ongoing capital needs and hence was unable to pay dividends. He also further adds that had Berkshire Hathaway distributed all its earnings as dividends, the master would have left with no capital at all to be put into his other high return yielding investments. Thus, by not letting the operational performance of the company deteriorate by retaining earnings and not distributing it as dividends, he was able to avoid a situation in the future where he would have had too put in his own capital in the business.

http://www.equitymaster.com/detail.asp?date=8/16/2007&story=1

Nine Mistakes that Investors Make

Nine mistakes that investors make

1. Failure to diversify

2. Paying too much for a stock

3. Buying a stock with a high payout ratio*

4. Too much trading

5. Failure to read the company's quarterly and annual reports

6. Failure to invest in stocks after a long decline

7. Failure to keep adequate records (recordkeeping)**


*Stock with high payout ratio

Most companies need to invest their retained earnings to grow their business.

A low payout ratio is preferred, since it means that the company is plowing back its profits into future growth.

Examine what percentage of earnings per share are paid out in dividend. For instance:

• if the company earns $4 a share and pays out $3, that's too much.
  
• most would much prefer a company that paid out less than 50% - 30 or 40% would be even better.

Companies that don't pay a dividend at all are often very speculative. They can be extremely volatile.



Recordkeeping**

This is a common blunder. You should have a filing cabinet that holds a folder for each stock.

The first thing you should put in that file is the confirmation slip for the purchase of the stock, which should have been sent to you by your broker.

Then when you sell the stock, you will know what you paid for it so that you can tell your accountant. He will in turn tell the IRS.