Sentences with phrase «yield portfolios do»

The high - dividend - yield portfolios do not generate statistically significant differences in excess returns.

Not exact matches

«We're not there at that point in the economic cycle so we believe high yield at this point does have a place in investors» portfolios that are diversified.»

Government bonds could help reduce default risk, but because of the length of maturity required to earn any meaningful yield, they do little to reduce duration risk - i.e. the overall sensitivity of a portfolio to interest rate rises.

There are a multitude of reasons as to why this occurs but it's a powerful enough force that many investors have done quite well for themselves over an investing lifetime by focusing on dividend stocks, specifically one of two strategies - dividend growth, which focuses on acquiring a diversified portfolio of companies that have raised their dividends at rates considerably above average and high dividend yield, which focuses on stocks that offer significantly above - average dividend yields as measured by the dividend rate compared to the stock market price.

«How do high - yield bonds fit into a diversified portfolios?

Even with low yields and rising interest rates, bonds still tend to do their job by dampening volatility and minimizing losses for the overall portfolio.

Add in an impressive dividend yield and these stocks could be the difference between a portfolio that outperforms and one that doesn't.

Over the long term the nominal return on a duration - managed bond portfolio (or bond index — the duration on those doesn't change very much) converges on the starting yield.

You know, how do I get income in my portfolio, I'll use bait, I'll use some of the high - yield market, I'll use short volatility, I'll create leverage in my portfolio through margin, et cetera.

If you are the kind of income investor who's happy with dividends that are steady and can grow year after year, or even decades, and don't care as much about yields — 3M yields 2.3 % currently — 3M is a right fit for your portfolio.

It is true that we have sold CVX in our portfolios not so long ago because we believe there was better opportunity, but I didn't want to take only super winners to go against the high dividend yield portfolio.

I was quite surprised to see that those four stocks didn't beat the high yield portfolio over the past five years.

Although decades of history have conclusively proved it is more profitable to be an owner of corporate America (viz., stocks), rather than a lender to it (viz., bonds), there are times when equities are unattractive compared to other asset classes (think late - 1999 when stock prices had risen so high the earnings yields were almost non-existent) or they do not fit with the particular goals or needs of the portfolio owner.

Higher risk (higher yield) bonds tend to be closely correlated with equities which means that such bonds do not really dampen volatility or smooth out returns over time when combined with equities in a portfolio.

But just because the market is producing such a historically low yield doesn't mean your portfolio has to as well.

I don't give advice, but I do wish she'd sold those shares, or at least diversifed into a broader high yield portfolio.

High yield can be a source of income and diversification in a portfolio, but don't expect it to be your ballast against equities.

While equities are the largest portion of their portfolio, they also do high yield bonds, mortgage home loans, farmland, etc..

I don't expect bond yields to rise sharply, but as the last few weeks have demonstrated, even a modest rise in yields will inflict some pain on portfolios.

Not only does it offer an attractive yield, it also provides exposure to a diversified portfolio of over 200 Canadian preferred shares and offers regular monthly dividend income.

Continuously declining long - term rates created two tailwinds for his portfolio: 1) It continuously reduced borrowing costs for highly leveraged companies; and 2) Drove up values of high yielding stocks (look at what utilities, MLPs and REITs have done over the same time period).

A second reason to be cautious about high - yield bonds is that they don't provide much stability in a portfolio when you're likely to need it most.

More importantly, this is providing an example of how bonds often are not correlated with stocks (they don't move up and down together), thus giving us the diversification benefits of including the fixed - income asset class in our portfolios, while providing a higher yield and higher expected return than cash.

Though the periodic payments do add to overall portfolio performance, dividend - yielding stocks are not immune from the volatility of the overall market.

My portfolio performance is not doing that well at this market moment, however I ignore the market noise and I am using this to my advantage by buying companies with great dividend yield and valuation.

Convinced it was the way to go, I converted my portfolio into one that was yielding 8 % dividend annually and did that for a year or so.

This way I can get higher yields, with leverage if I so choose, and the benefit of having professionals do the buying and selling of the portfolio held by the fund.

The orange line tracks a portfolio of stocks that don't pay dividends at all, the purple line tracks stocks that pay the lowest 30 % of dividend yields, and the green line tracks stocks in the highest 30 % yield group.

Back when I was exclusively a bond manager, 2001 - 2003, which I chronicled in my series «The Education of a Corporate Bond Manager,» I successfully struggled with one concept: when do you try to add more yield to your portfolio, and when don't you?

Though the portfolio that I manage for clients has an above average dividend yield, I do not look for dividend yields; I look for solid companies, and the dividend yields find me.

And if interest rates do start to rise, that will mean good news for investors looking for income for the portfolios because it will mean that they don't have to take on as much risk to obtain the same yield from their investments.

Don't they face the same problems that they won't be able to generate as they roll their portfolios into lower yielding bonds going forward (since rates have come down so much)?

In both scenarios $ 100,000 yields savings of over $ 87,000 in fees and a portfolio that's $ 175,000 larger for the Do - It - Yourself (DIY) indexer over 25 years.

Or if somehow it did — if investors got so petrified that they piled into bonds to the extent that yields went negative to that degree — then I would assume the stock portion of your portfolio effectively fell to zero at that point.

But beyond this, even if yields do rise modestly, a well - bought portfolio of REITs and MLPs can offer something that a standard bond portfolio can not: an income stream that rises over time.

My dividend investing portfolio's average yield is approximately 10 %, so EAD's 10.19 % dividend yield does nothing to raise or lower that average yield, and I'm fine with that.

And, do you recommend a high - yield investment portfolio to create the necessary cash flow during retirement?

CDs can increase your cash yield in a portfolio, but even a high yield CD does not offer very much growth at all.

Mike probably owns our Balanced Growth Portfolio which does have 3 bond funds in it; emerging markets, high yield bonds, and high - grade corporate bonds.

-- less fees: even though ETF fees are much smaller than mutual funds, they do charge more than holding those stocks directly — more control: being able to select your type of portfolio, holding stocks that you believe in and going for the stocks that you know and targeting the yield that matches you — more fun?

If de-risking your portfolio and investing in undervalued high - yield assets is something you want to do, we're happy to help.

As for insulating your portfolio from market setbacks, bonds at today's lower yields may not provide quite as much protection as they have historically, but they should still do a good job of stabilizing your portfolio when stock prices head south.

I'll probably do a future post on the dividend yield of this portfolio.

For perspective, the $ 48.27 increase in annual expected dividend income that came about completely organically, via dividend increases, is the same as investing $ 1,379 in fresh capital at a 3.5 % yield (the approximate yield of the portfolio as a whole)-- except I didn't invest a dime to lay claim to that extra passive income.

The «low hanging fruit» opportunity is the trade off between yield — which they don't have enough of — and liquidity — where they have an excess — to enhance portfolio returns.

Therefore if you would have a very high yielding portfolio, and you can actually manage a safe withdrawal rate of 7 %, would be done pretty quickly.

If you put together a portfolio of 6 % or higher dividend yield, when the broader market (S&P 500) is yielding 2 %, you are likely to experience under - performance in total returns over the index over the long - term because market doesn't offer very high yields without reason.

On the other hand, dividend investors raise strong points: — less fees: even though ETF fees are much smaller than mutual funds, they do charge more than holding those stocks directly — more control: being able to select your type of portfolio, holding stocks that you believe in and going for the stocks that you know and targeting the yield that matches you — more fun?

It is true that we have sold CVX in our portfolios not so long ago because we believe there was better opportunity, but I didn't want to take only super winners to go against the high dividend yield portfolio.

Those investors usually increase their bond holdings to reduce risk in their portfolios, but doing so in the current low - yield environment means risking not having enough income in retirement along with reduced prospects for capital appreciation.