Sentences with phrase «yielding stocks did»

In examining Table 1, you can see that the higher - yielding stocks do not necessarily appear to be sacrificing capital gains, nor do the lower - yielding stocks appear to have an exclusive claim to high capital gains.

Regrettably, high - yield stocks didn't provide much of a buffer during the recent collapse — they generally declined in line with the overall market.

High - yield stocks don't always come with high risk.

Not exact matches

If the spring and summer don't bring some wet relief, the U.S. might well face another year of very low yields after last year's summer drought — with the difference that global wheat, corn and soybean stocks this time around would already be depleted.

Phantom - stock plans (or stock - appreciation rights, which are very similar) can yield the same payoff option plans do.

«When the Fed was raising rates and bond yields were moving up, traditionally defensives don't do well, and more cyclical stocks tend to do better and financials do better,» he said.

To be sure, the new generation of savers faces a challenge in building a nest egg when investing choices are bleak: Do they go with risky stocks or super-low bond yields?

AT&T's dividend yield is about 5 - 6 %, but the stock did not perform well.

At some point, provided that dividend is safe and investors are convinced it is going to be maintained, the dividend yield on the stock itself is going to be so attractive that it brings in buyers from the sidelines, people who otherwise can not stand to see the yield right there in front of them without doing something about it.

Is n`t — do n`t you think there will come a time when the yield on the 10 year will start to provide some competition from the yields in the stock market and that will have a problem for equity investors?

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.

Not only did Gross take on stocks as an investment, he directly called out long - time stock advocate Jeremy Siegel of the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School for promoting unrealistic expectations of future equity yields.

To attribute the entire decline in stock yields to interest rates as if it is a «fair value» relationship is to introduce a profound «omitted variables» bias into the whole analysis, which is exactly what the Fed Model does.

However, keep in mind that the first move higher following a substantial market correction does not generally yield stellar results because new leadership in the stock market is just becoming established.

As long - term investments, many factors that roil the stock or even broader bond markets don't affect high yield, the panelists pointed out.

Investors need to be careful and make sure they do more research beyond just looking at the dividend yield of a stock.

Stocks slide on rising rates and yield curve inversion concerns, but a recession doesn't look likely, judging by other economic data and the high - yield bond...

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

Bond yields have likely bottomed out, and we don't see scope for big rises in already elevated stock market valuations amid tepid earnings growth.

Didn't want anyone to buy the stock thinking they were getting a 7 % yield.

I don't think it's a surprise that energy and financial stocks popped up on the high yield low PE screen.

The dividend yield of 6.98 % is not accurate as it does not reflect the recent 3:2 stock split.

Holding a lower yielding stock with a higher growth rate will at some point provide higher returns assuming the growth rates don't change.

If you first grow and then rebalance to more yield returning investments, you will have to realize your gains at some point along the way... I assume ideally you would prefer to do that in a slow and steady process after retirement, but when you deal with growth stocks you might also want to protect your gains by setting stop losses which could then create a huge taxable event on some random Friday morning...

Small stocks and many international stocks don't pay much income; income from high - yield and foreign bonds may be higher than for high - quality bonds, but also more variable.

The mirror - image transactions — thousands of them over a four - year period — didn't yield any profit on the stocks, because they were conducted usually within moments of each other.

It doesn't have much of a yield — just 1.3 % — but it's attractive as a growth stock.

Sara Silverstein: So the 10 - year yield went through an important threshold at 3 %, and stocks didn't respond that great, what do you think about that?

How does the U.S. stock market earnings yield (inverse of price - to - earnings ratio, or E / P) interact with the U.S. inflation rate over the long run?

Does anyone really believe that extreme yield - seeking has not already played out in the stock and bond markets?

Do they not recognize that the absence of yield on short - term money is exactly why stocks and bonds are now also priced to deliver next to nothing over the coming 10 - 12 years?

The Federal Reserve's policy errors are now becoming quite apparent, particularly when you look at the major homebuilder stocks, The yield on the 10 - year Treasury breached below 1.80 today, but even lower mortgage rates aren't doing much to spur sales so far this year.

As usual, I don't place too much emphasis on this sort of forecast, but to the extent that I make any comments at all about the outlook for 2006, the bottom line is this: 1) we can't rule out modest potential for stock appreciation, which would require the maintenance or expansion of already high price / peak earnings multiples; 2) we also should recognize an uncomfortably large potential for market losses, particularly given that the current bull market has now outlived the median and average bull, yet at higher valuations than most bulls have achieved, a flat yield curve with rising interest rate pressures, an extended period of internal divergence as measured by breadth and other market action, and complacency at best and excessive bullishness at worst, as measured by various sentiment indicators; 3) there is a moderate but still not compelling risk of an oncoming recession, which would become more of a factor if we observe a substantial widening of credit spreads and weakness in the ISM Purchasing Managers Index in the months ahead, and; 4) there remains substantial potential for U.S. dollar weakness coupled with «unexpectedly» persistent inflation pressures, particularly if we do observe economic weakness.

With 25 consecutive years of dividend growth, a yield over 5 %, the possibility that shares are 7 % undervalued, and the ability to collect «monthly rent checks» without having to actually go out and do the hard work typically involved with being a landlord, this is a stock that should be on every dividend growth investor's radar right now.

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

Admittedly, during the aggressive quantitative easing measures by the Fed over the past few years, high yielding dividend stocks have done quite well.

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.

I don't really worry about stocks being «overvalued» other than the reviewing P / E; I think price is reflected in the dividend yield and I'm investing more for income than capital gains.

Non-asset holders were punished — their bank deposits now generate little or no income, and they were forced to move into riskier assets, such as stocks, bonds, real estate, or «anything that offers some yield and is not bolted down to the floor» (please see my answer to What kind of market distortions does the Fed loaning out money at 0 % cause?).

No doubt SE looks like a compelling stock with a great current yield but it does look a bit expensive based on current valuations.

It doesn't help that 10 - year bond yields are still lower than the prospective operating earnings yield on the S&P 500 (the «Fed Model»), not only because the model is built on an omitted variables bias (see the August 22 2005 comment), but also because the model statistically underperforms a simpler rule that says «get in when stock yields are high and interest rates are falling, and get out when the reverse is true.»

Question: when you say «I do make exceptions and own both higher and lower yielding dividend stocks», why do you generally steer away from dividends higher than 5 %?

This high risk fund does not require a initial public offering (IPO) so the stocks are offered to a selected group of investors that are seeking a high - risk, high - yield investment.

It's not fool proof, but I just don't need the risk anymore that come with high yielding stocks (6 % +).

When the spread between the 90 - day and 10 - year Treasury yield is 121 basis points or more, the stock market does much better than when it's 120 basis points or less.

If the 10 - year yield stays at this level, then, according to our indicator, we don't have to start worrying about stocks until the 90 - day yield gets over 1 %.

It was done by an intern of mine who is very highly qualified and it was written in July of 2004 titled, An Investigation into the Relationship between Changes in Yield Curve and the Performance of Stock Indices.

Yet, I do make exceptions and own both higher and lower yielding dividend stocks.

I do think there is merit in looking at general rates (we likely won't return to the rate environment of the early 1980's for example), but I wouldn't be getting excited about stock prices at these levels for the sole reason that bond yields are really low.

The problem I've always had with the stocks vs bond yield argument is that if rates rise, the whole thing doesn't make sense.