Yield Rank | Largest | Smallest | Total |
2.6% and higher | 34.0% | 8.1% | 22.5% |
Under 2.6% | 11.1% | 8.3% | 9.5% |
Total | 19.3% | 8.3% | 13.4% |
That is pretty stunning. We knew dividend stocks did better (22.5% versus 9.5%). But large cap dividend stocks did even better (34%). Let us see how this looks going back to 2006:
Yield Rank | Largest | Smallest | Total |
2.6% and higher | 30.5% | 12.3% | 21.6% |
Under 2.6% | 9.7% | 4.4% | 6.3% |
Total | 16.1% | 5.9% | 9.9% |
Pretty interesting. Of course you can never assume that what has happened in the past will happen in the future. But it might be worth at least a shot! The differential seems to be much more than chance.
Here are current stocks on list meeting that criteria (as of last weekend):
Stock | Initial Price | 52 week low | Mkt Cap |
25.97 | 20.22 | 132,863 | |
CA | 29.53 | 27.84 | 12,964 |
34.63 | 33.39 | 9,612 | |
45.68 | 33.10 | 5,230 | |
BAH | 21.00 | 16.61 | 3,212 |
42.80 | 41.45 | 2,070 | |
9.50 | 7.38 | 1,648 | |
58.11 | 48.52 | 1,127 |
Guess you can see why I added CA and CSCO in May!
2 comments:
Marsh,
Thanks for the quick reply. I very much appreciate the data going back to 2006 when dividends were not so popular. I understand that it is not your best data but Wow! That kind of performance makes you want to believe in MFI.
Marsh,
Maybe this is to come later when you have more time.
As you know the number of 2.6% or greater dividend is limited and there may be only one new one each month.
My question is to see if the returns are hurt by including large cap dividend stocks between 1.8% to 2.5% as second choices.
I think you would find that returns are not hurt that much and having the additional selection would assure that you can find 20 to 30 stocks each year.
Post a Comment