There are continuous debates for
and against dividend stocks and dividend growth stocks. I hope this article
would settle the debates. If you’re making money with any strategy recently,
stick with it. From this test, I conclude that dividend stocks and dividend
growth stocks are worse than non-dividend stocks. Read it with an open mind. I
accept confirmations and challenges but not “You’re wrong without explanation”.
Do not be biased and data fit to
back up your conclusion. Ensure the test can be reproduced with identical
results, so there is no cherry picking and no bias. Ensure the number of stocks
and the number of tests are large enough so the results are statistically
acceptable.
Here is my test procedure. It
would be a sample test procedure for other strategies.
A test consists of selecting a
number of stocks according to a specific criterion such as the 30 stocks giving
top dividends. The performance of the test is defined as the average return of
the specific number of stocks (30 in my test) after a period of time (a year in
my test).
·
I have four tests for each period of a year:
Dividend Stocks, Dividend Growth Stocks, Non-Dividend Stocks and All Stocks.
Select the top 30 stocks for each test.
·
There are 10 tests and the results are averaged.
The first test starts in the beginning of a year and end at the end of the
year.
·
The last ten years resembles the current market
better than older dates. Hence, I start the test on 1-1-2005 and end on 1-1-2015.
·
The start date is Jan. 2 as Jan. 1 is a holiday.
In some tests, it is Jan. 3 or Jan. 4 due to weekends. It is the same for end
dates. The results are annualized (= Return * 365 /No. of days tested).
·
The data base is S&P 500. Typically they are
the stocks of largest companies. It is the All Stocks.
·
Using educated estimates, I add 2% dividend
yield to the performance of the S&P500 index, 5% to dividend stocks and 4%
to dividend growth stocks. Testing other strategies, dividends may not be as important
as these tests.
Alternatively, I could use ^SP500TR from Yahoo!Finance. I calculated and tested estimates. It would be very time consuming and impossible not using estimates as the dividend yield changes every trade session.
Alternatively, I could use ^SP500TR from Yahoo!Finance. I calculated and tested estimates. It would be very time consuming and impossible not using estimates as the dividend yield changes every trade session.
·
Dividend growth stocks have the top dividend
yields and dividend growth rate equal to or greater than 10%.
·
Non-dividend stocks are stocks without
dividends. Just select 30 of them randomly to be consistent.
·
You can find performance reports on dividend
ETFs or funds specialized in dividend stocks, dividend growth stocks or a
combination. Compare the results with SPY. Use them to confirm or challenge my
test results.
My test has a new set of 30 stocks every year, so an
exceedingly good or bad year only affects one test, not all ten tests with the exception
of some stocks moving up or down for many years.
I call it window of testing as opposed to what most
funds advertise by setting $10,000 or so and let it rises and falls for a long
period (say 10 years).
·
Be careful on tests using small stocks that tend
to bankrupt more often. The chance of survivor bias would give them better
results than the actual results.
Result
The above tests can be reproduced
from a historical database if it handles survivor bias the same as mine. It is
no cherry picking and I have no bias towards any of the test strategies. The
result is for educational purpose only. I am not responsible for any error.
Avg. One-Year
Return
|
Beat All by
|
|
Dividend
|
10%
|
-1%
|
Dividend Growth
|
9%
|
-12%
|
No Dividend
|
16%
|
62%
|
All stocks
|
10%
|
N/A
|
·
From the above table, both dividend stocks and
dividend growth stocks do not beat All stocks in this database.
·
Non-dividend stocks beat All stocks in this
database by a sizable margin. They represent the companies plowing back their
profits to development/research and/or buyback instead of giving dividends. I
was surprised by the huge return.
·
You should change your tests according to what
you normally do to reflect new trading. For example, you should select 3 stocks
only instead of 30 and/or delete foreign countries. However, it would be cherry
picking.
·
If your dividend strategy has better return than
SPY, do not change your strategy. My tests here are simple without many other
filters. Most likely you can improve your returns with better ROE, low Price /Cash
Flow, low Debt/Equity…
·
An article
(3/1/16) from MarketWatch indicated a different finding than mine; I checked out
that DVY (a dividend ETF) did not perform that well.
Improve the test if more time is available
·
Use 12 months instead of one month for each
test. Hence you should have 120 tests less 11 tests due to not enough data for
the last year (as of 2/15/2016).
·
Take out the top performer and the bottom
performer in the 30 selected stocks.
·
More weight on the last five years than the
previous five years. Alternatively, I have one test for each year in the first
five years and two tests for each year in the last five years.
Survivor bias
My historical database does not
handle the delisted stocks. When I see there are less than 500 stocks in the
database for S&P 500, I know they just deleted the stocks taken out from
S&P 500 that year. However, later on it includes new stocks added to the
S&P 500 index. The adverse impact of bankrupt stocks is far higher than the
acquired / merged stocks. For example, the return of the test not including
Lehman Brothers makes it look far better. All the tests here look better than
they actually are.
The bias can be reduced or even
eliminated by:
·
Larger companies as in this test.
· I use “All” stocks, which consists of the
S&P 500 stocks without those that have been delisted.
· The dividend stocks should have less survivor
bias than non-dividend stocks. I did not compensate this in my test results.
·
Actually resolve the bias by including the
delisted stocks if your database does not handle it.
From the following table, the
impact of 21% (0% means no bias) difference (both including the estimated
dividends) is not small. However, all the three strategies have the same impact
so it should not be a show stopper.
Avg.
Ann. Return
|
Difference
From
All
|
|
S&P
500
|
8%
|
-21%
|
All
|
10%
|
-------------------
For more of my reasoning, check out the book described next. It has 800 pages (6*9) for $9.99. It could be the best $10 you ever spend.
The above is an abstract from my book "Complete the Art of Investing" which is available from Amazon.
I challenged to have the best-performed article in Seeking Alpha history, an investing site, for recommending 5 or more stocks in one year after the publish date. The concepts for that article are discussed in this book.
For more of my reasoning, check out the book described next. It has 800 pages (6*9) for $9.99. It could be the best $10 you ever spend.
The above is an abstract from my book "Complete the Art of Investing" which is available from Amazon.
I challenged to have the best-performed article in Seeking Alpha history, an investing site, for recommending 5 or more stocks in one year after the publish date. The concepts for that article are discussed in this book.
No comments:
Post a Comment