/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>22763558
pic related

>>22355724
zoom out fren

>>21868180
dividends are for everyone, the focus of them should be dependent on your investment strategy.

>>21868254
$21K passive income reinvested off of $500K is nothing to balk at. how much $ did you invest total last year? more than $21K?

>>21868414
see above. also, if you do your due diligence, you'll be able to find companies that have paid and raised their dividends over 50+ years. And its not like dividend growth companies don't appreciate their share price. Look at AAPL, MSFT, JNJ, SBUX, V. All provide a divvy, all are owned by me, all are continuing increase their dividend every year my passive income gets a raise every year.

>>21713672
>beating the S&P 500 is a scam

also wtf AAPL you going to 3T soon or what?

THREADLY REMINDER THAT DIVIDENDS ARE YOUR FREN AND REINVESTED DIVIDENDS OUTPACE THE MARKET

>>20586918
did you even factor in reinvested dividends? you must be a leftist with this fake news bullshit you post

>>20555122
lol imagine believing that. let me guess, the dividend portfolio had a bunch of hand pick stocks that failed while the "random" didn't.

and you do realize MSFT has a dividend and its the 3rd largest position in my dividend portfolio behind KO and AAPL, right?

>>20256763
bet

>>20223352

>>19885141
why do people keep making me post this?

that video is basically attacking a bunch of strawman arguments from what "dividend investors" have said to him.

while here in Gainsville, Realistan, i can see that dividends are a massive component of the markets growth.

sure, you can get richer by selecting the best growth stocks, but you need to know which stocks to select in the first place and have very little mistakes

>>19865134
uh oh

>>19795019
>implying you did anything here.

lol no VYM is high dividend yield, not S&P 500 dividend aristocrats and contenders and challengers. Those who chase yield get burnt. Make a real comparison. Unless Treasuries outperformed the S&P500 over the last decade (hint: they did not), your argument is irrelevant.

stay poor, madfag

>>19774394
u wot m8?

>>19734457
>>19734444
sure, if you pick the right growth stocks,

you act as if I don't have a growth portfolio in my mutual funds.

but if you're looking at the big picture, dividends account for a massive percentage of overall gains in the stock market'

also, the purpose of dividends for retirement is: 1. I don't have to sell any shares if I'm living off dividends. 2. Today, the first $40K of dividend income is tax free (80K if you're married). On your sold shares to maintain retirement you're going to be paying capital gains tax.

>>19619955
not exactly. if I wanted to live off $21K i wouldn't have purchased the home I did. And I'd probably also work part time at Lowes, Home Depot or Starbucks where they give you full benefits for part time work. However I want to be able to retire and not worry about any money issues and have a buffer of about $2K per month I can continue to invest if I want.

Also, you don't need millions or well over a million to live off divvies. If i put my entire investment portfolio into MO, I'd be making 40K right now. However I"m adverse to risk.

moreover, my DRIP + dividend growth = compounding to the max which does the heavy lifting for me instead of me working to make money to invest. it really does start to snowball

also, I don't have to worry about selling shares in the future to get income and I don't have to worry about capital gains tax

also pic related

>>19387935
only if you picked the correct growth stocks. if you did not, they did not. And over the last decade S&P 500 outperformed all hedgefunds over that timeline.

>>19387925
this is why my focus is on companies with lower payout ratios, great free cash flow, consistent dividend growth over 10+ years (some 50+ years) and companies that have indicated their commitment to their dividend.

Also if a company suspends or cuts their dividend, I (99% of the time) will sell and put that capital into a safer asset. Ex. I just sold my position in TAP and put it into PG.

ALL: I've never indicated you need to only invest in dividend stocks, I have a growth portfolio myself in my mutual funds. However denying the value of dividends to overall growth and compounding interest is plain ignorant. do what you want, but contemplate doing the DEW

>>19387162
i've watched that video multiple times, except he's wrong

>>19230509

>>19201100
>>19201151

o rly?

NOBL, HDV, DVY, SPYD?
I know HDV has higher returns (less percentage loss that is at the moment) so far

>>19084647
Which one's

>>19016248
please tell me which stocks will continue to grow over the next 20 years. you have to pick winners only because if you pick losers, you'll lose money. There's a reason I let a mutual fund company handle my growth stocks: i have no time to research the next big thing in a myriad of IPOs and changing dynamics.

also pic related

>>19016379
>i don't want a shit 3% dividend
time and compounding is your fren. my current yield on cost for KO is over 15% and growing. dividend growth is where it matters.

like other person, see pic related

>>18803630
>he doesn't understand compounding interest
1. Dividend growth stocks grow their dividend. I get more money for doing nothing
2. All dividends are reinvested somehow either DRIP or me using the divvy to buy a different stock
3. Rinse and repeat.
4. My passive income starts making its own passive income.
5.?????
6. Profit

Look at LOW, dividend of 2.07% but an annual growth rate of nearly 17%. Rule of 72 means every 4.5 years my income from LOW will double on its own without adding any additional capital or reinvest the dividends. This compounds more when I keep adding capital and reinvesting the dividends.

Theres something called yield on cost. My YoC for KO is about 13%. That means every year my KO stock is earning me 13% of my total investment at this time. That will continue to go up every year KO increases its dividend (they've done so ever year for the last 55 years)

also, pic related

>>18459013