Page 1 of 3

The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 13:05
by cannew
Here's an article by John Heinzl on his suggestions for the Perfect Dividend ETF: https://secure.globeadvisor.com/servlet ... STORCLINIC fixed
Create your own Perfect Dividend ETF:
#1 – select 4 to 6 stocks suggested
#2 – select 4 to 5 stocks suggested
#3 – select 2 to 3 stocks suggested
#4 – select 2 to 3 stocks suggested
#5 – select 2 to 3 stocks suggested

One would then hold between 14 to 20 good dividend growth stocks with no fees, no reason to sell or rebalance, and just keep adding to those, ignoring all others. Then sit back and watch your income grow over time.

I'm often asked what my 18 holdings are, well 95% are ones hes listed. I do have a few I wish I hadn't bought.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 13:18
by Lazy Ninja
That link didn't work for me. Try this:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-i ... e35453106/

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 15:24
by Taggart
I've already started making changes to our taxable portfolio of individual equities in the weeks before Heinzl's article came out. A little different from his layout. Not interested in dividend ETF's at all.

I've decided to cut it down from seven Canadian sectors to five.

Combined consumer staples and consumer discretionary into one sector.

Combined Electrical Utilities and Telecom.

The other three sectors were kept intact as is. Financials, Pipelines and Industrials.

20% targets for each sector.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 15:40
by adrian2
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 13:05
I'm often asked what my 18 holdings are, well 95% are ones hes listed. I do have a few I wish I hadn't bought.
You've been repeatedly asked to state your holdings not out of idle curiosity, but because you were claiming stuff that's math-challenged, like the dividend from your holdings covers the RRIF minimum withdrawals. Giving cryptic answers does not enhance your credibility.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 16:08
by cannew
adrian2 wrote:
25 Jun 2017 15:40
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 13:05
I'm often asked what my 18 holdings are, well 95% are ones hes listed. I do have a few I wish I hadn't bought.
You've been repeatedly asked to state your holdings not out of idle curiosity, but because you were claiming stuff that's math-challenged, like the dividend from your holdings covers the RRIF minimum withdrawals. Giving cryptic answers does not enhance your credibility.
You probably won't believe that my income is currently over $100k, just from dividends either, but I know it and could care less what others believe.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 16:47
by Thegipper
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 13:05
Here's an article by John Heinzl on his suggestions for the Perfect Dividend ETF: https://secure.globeadvisor.com/servlet ... STORCLINIC fixed
Create your own Perfect Dividend ETF:
#1 – select 4 to 6 stocks suggested
#2 – select 4 to 5 stocks suggested
#3 – select 2 to 3 stocks suggested
#4 – select 2 to 3 stocks suggested
#5 – select 2 to 3 stocks suggested

One would then hold between 14 to 20 good dividend growth stocks with no fees, no reason to sell or rebalance, and just keep adding to those, ignoring all others. Then sit back and watch your income grow over time.

I'm often asked what my 18 holdings are, well 95% are ones hes listed. I do have a few I wish I hadn't bought.
An interesting article. Between my suppose and myself we have close to 220k in our TFSAs. Constructing a portfolio in this manner has a fair bit of appeal. It would gives us about $800 per month of tax free money.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 18:59
by adrian2
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 16:08
adrian2 wrote:
25 Jun 2017 15:40
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 13:05
I'm often asked what my 18 holdings are, well 95% are ones hes listed. I do have a few I wish I hadn't bought.
You've been repeatedly asked to state your holdings not out of idle curiosity, but because you were claiming stuff that's math-challenged, like the dividend from your holdings covers the RRIF minimum withdrawals. Giving cryptic answers does not enhance your credibility.
You probably won't believe that my income is currently over $100k, just from dividends either, but I know it and could care less what others believe.
That's not so hard to believe, and nobody challenged you on that front.
However, when you start to pull Beardstown Ladies figures, expect some tough questions.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 20:58
by cannew
adrian2 wrote:
25 Jun 2017 18:59
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 16:08
adrian2 wrote:
25 Jun 2017 15:40


You've been repeatedly asked to state your holdings not out of idle curiosity, but because you were claiming stuff that's math-challenged, like the dividend from your holdings covers the RRIF minimum withdrawals. Giving cryptic answers does not enhance your credibility.
You probably won't believe that my income is currently over $100k, just from dividends either, but I know it and could care less what others believe.
That's not so hard to believe, and nobody challenged you on that front.
However, when you start to pull Beardstown Ladies figures, expect some tough questions.
Well, With almost 60% of our holdings in rrif , giving nearly 60k it has covered the withdrawal.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 21:10
by AltaRed
Which means your portfolio yield has to exceed the withdrawal minimum for a mid- 70s individual AND assuming no net re-investment of dividends. IOW, 5.5% or better.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 21:30
by cannew
AltaRed wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:10
Which means your portfolio yield has to exceed the withdrawal minimum for a mid- 70s individual AND assuming no net re-investment of dividends. IOW, 5.5% or better.
Yes, 6.095%

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 21:41
by adrian2
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:30
AltaRed wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:10
Which means your portfolio yield has to exceed the withdrawal minimum for a mid- 70s individual AND assuming no net re-investment of dividends. IOW, 5.5% or better.
Yes, 6.095%
Again, Beardstown Ladies math.
You are either innumerate, or have a mild case of amnesia, or...

Put me to shame by disclosing your positions with a 6.095% yield (love all those digits!).

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 25 Jun 2017 22:50
by GreatLaker
Stocks in John Heinzl's dividend portfolio in the Globe and Mail's Strategy Lab have dividend yields ranging from a low of 2.62% to a high of 4.69%. Looks like a yield (on market value) of slightly under 4%.

Here's a link (sorry if it is behind the pay wall).
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/globe- ... e15722679/

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 07:42
by Taggart
GreatLaker wrote:
25 Jun 2017 22:50
Stocks in John Heinzl's dividend portfolio in the Globe and Mail's Strategy Lab have dividend yields ranging from a low of 2.62% to a high of 4.69%. Looks like a yield (on market value) of slightly under 4%.

Here's a link (sorry if it is behind the pay wall).
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/globe- ... e15722679/
Yes, as of May 31st John Heinzl's portfolio yielded 3.9%.

A deeper dive into my dividend portfolio

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 09:32
by SQRT
adrian2 wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:41
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:30
AltaRed wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:10
Which means your portfolio yield has to exceed the withdrawal minimum for a mid- 70s individual AND assuming no net re-investment of dividends. IOW, 5.5% or better.
Yes, 6.095%
Again, Beardstown Ladies math.
You are either innumerate, or have a mild case of amnesia, or...

Put me to shame by disclosing your positions with a 6.095% yield (love all those digits!).
I don't think a portfolio of those names would generate a 6% current yield? Maybe yield on cost (which is a BS number).

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 10:41
by cannew
adrian2 wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:41
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:30
AltaRed wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:10
Which means your portfolio yield has to exceed the withdrawal minimum for a mid- 70s individual AND assuming no net re-investment of dividends. IOW, 5.5% or better.
Yes, 6.095%
Again, Beardstown Ladies math.
You are either innumerate, or have a mild case of amnesia, or...

Put me to shame by disclosing your positions with a 6.095% yield (love all those digits!).
Guess I have to eat my words, at least for 2016.
In 2015 our withdrawals were $56k while our rrif dividends were $59k so they did cover the withdrawals.
However in 2016 withdrawals were $64k while rrif div’s were $62k, short $2k. In 2016 our rrif value went up 11.5% (with no trades other than reinvested div's) while the divs only went up 4%. 2016 must have been a good year for market increase.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 10:44
by deaddog
SQRT wrote:
26 Jun 2017 09:32
Maybe yield on cost (which is a BS number).
Isn't yield on cost how you quote bonds, savings etc. Why do you consider it a BS number.

I also hear dividend investors say that they are receiving x number % on their money while they wait for a stock to recover.

For a buy and hold investor of dividend growth stocks, investing for income, I would think yield on cost would be a legit number.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 11:09
by adrian2
cannew wrote:
26 Jun 2017 10:41
adrian2 wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:41
cannew wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:30

Yes, 6.095%
Again, Beardstown Ladies math.
You are either innumerate, or have a mild case of amnesia, or...

Put me to shame by disclosing your positions with a 6.095% yield (love all those digits!).
Guess I have to eat my words, at least for 2016.
In 2015 our withdrawals were $56k while our rrif dividends were $59k so they did cover the withdrawals.
However in 2016 withdrawals were $64k while rrif div’s were $62k, short $2k. In 2016 our rrif value went up 11.5% (with no trades other than reinvested div's) while the divs only went up 4%. 2016 must have been a good year for market increase.
At least you're admitting your mistake, but once again you're obfuscating it by throwing lots of numbers on the plate, mostly as a self-congratulatory exercise.

The difference between your too precise yield number of 6.095% and the true yield of 3.9% is way bigger than the difference between $64k and $62k.

Alt.math

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 11:46
by cannew
adrian2 wrote:
26 Jun 2017 11:09
cannew wrote:
26 Jun 2017 10:41
adrian2 wrote:
25 Jun 2017 21:41

Again, Beardstown Ladies math.
You are either innumerate, or have a mild case of amnesia, or...

Put me to shame by disclosing your positions with a 6.095% yield (love all those digits!).
Guess I have to eat my words, at least for 2016.
In 2015 our withdrawals were $56k while our rrif dividends were $59k so they did cover the withdrawals.
However in 2016 withdrawals were $64k while rrif div’s were $62k, short $2k. In 2016 our rrif value went up 11.5% (with no trades other than reinvested div's) while the divs only went up 4%. 2016 must have been a good year for market increase.
At least you're admitting your mistake, but once again you're obfuscating it by throwing lots of numbers on the plate, mostly as a self-congratulatory exercise.

The difference between your too precise yield number of 6.095% and the true yield of 3.9% is way bigger than the difference between $64k and $62k.

Alt.math
Yield 2015 was 5.71% on rrif MV
Yield 2016 was 5.31% on rrif MV
You keep asking the questions and when I provide answers I'm "self-congratulatory"? These are the numbers and and they pretty much match with what I'm been saying. The point I've tried to make was that a DG strategy can provide a growing income which will offset withdrawals and meet\exceed living expenses, without drawing down capital.
I do use Yield on Investments, as I don't bother with market value.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 13:02
by adrian2
cannew wrote:
26 Jun 2017 11:46
Yield 2015 was 5.71% on rrif MV
Yield 2016 was 5.31% on rrif MV
You keep asking the questions and when I provide answers I'm "self-congratulatory"? These are the numbers and and they pretty much match with what I'm been saying. The point I've tried to make was that a DG strategy can provide a growing income which will offset withdrawals and meet\exceed living expenses, without drawing down capital.
I do use Yield on Investments, as I don't bother with market value.
You're once again contradicting yourself:
"Yield 2016 was 5.31% on rrif MV"
"I do use Yield on Investments, as I don't bother with market value."

Is 5.31% on market value or not?

If it's on market value, then I still believe you're in alt.math territory to get 5.3% out of a universe yielding 3.9%.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 13:16
by longinvest
Adrian,

I was first tempted to tell you "Why do you still bother?", but when I thought a little more about it, I realized that it is actually very important not to let alternative math calculations proliferate on our forums, as this would significantly diminish its quality.

So, thank you for caring and for exposing unsustainable claims for what they are.

longinvest

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 13:24
by SQRT
deaddog wrote:
26 Jun 2017 10:44
SQRT wrote:
26 Jun 2017 09:32
Maybe yield on cost (which is a BS number).
Isn't yield on cost how you quote bonds, savings etc. Why do you consider it a BS number.

I also hear dividend investors say that they are receiving x number % on their money while they wait for a stock to recover.

For a buy and hold investor of dividend growth stocks, investing for income, I would think yield on cost would be a legit number.
No it should be yield on market. If you bought TD 20 years ago it's yield on cost would be about 20-22%? How would you use that? Dividend growth is important though, so you should know how fast your divs are growing. For TD it's about 8-10% over last 5 years. Your decision as to hold or sell will always be based on current yield not historical yield.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 13:27
by Descartes
3.9% is the yield on the 12 stock Heinzl portfolio which is neither the subject of the OP's article which is a portfolio of 20 stocks nor is it the 18 stock portfolio of the OP (which apparently has 17 stocks in common with that article).

Be precise if you must be pedantic.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 13:36
by adrian2
Descartes wrote:
26 Jun 2017 13:27
3.9% is the yield on the 12 stock Heinzl portfolio which is neither the subject of the OP's article which is a portfolio of 20 stocks nor is it the 18 stock portfolio of the OP (which apparently has 17 stocks in common with that article).
True, but that does not make claims of 6.095% / 5.71% / 5.31% yield any more credible, for a dividend growth portfolio.

He could just disclose the stocks and weights that he holds and let others verify his claims.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 13:43
by cannew
adrian2 wrote:
26 Jun 2017 13:02
cannew wrote:
26 Jun 2017 11:46
Yield 2015 was 5.71% on rrif MV
Yield 2016 was 5.31% on rrif MV
You keep asking the questions and when I provide answers I'm "self-congratulatory"? These are the numbers and and they pretty much match with what I'm been saying. The point I've tried to make was that a DG strategy can provide a growing income which will offset withdrawals and meet\exceed living expenses, without drawing down capital.
I do use Yield on Investments, as I don't bother with market value.
You're once again contradicting yourself:
"Yield 2016 was 5.31% on rrif MV"
"I do use Yield on Investments, as I don't bother with market value."

Is 5.31% on market value or not?

If it's on market value, then I still believe you're in alt.math territory to get 5.3% out of a universe yielding 3.9%.
MV stood for Market Value.
Like I said before you don't have to accept what I say, I've just tried to provide more information. Other than listing everything I own and the dividends received I guess I'll never satisfy you and others. So lets leave it that you disbelieve me and I'll remain happy with the results my portfolio is producing.

Re: The Perfect Dividend ETF

Posted: 26 Jun 2017 13:58
by BRIAN5000
Your decision as to hold or sell will always be based on current yield not historical yield.
Yeah I know I always get it wrong, I used to (still a consideration) weight stocks by risk, then equal weight, now the ones which have the highest (absolutely useless ) historical YOC will get a 4% weighting instead of a usual 3%. My YOC will be different from everyone else's depending on when I bought holding period, just as good as throwing darts but no pointy objects.

YOC
BMO 10.4%
ENB 10.5%
EMA 11.0%
BNS 11.2%
NA 11.8%
TD 13.4%
TRP 21.9%