The portfolios that we run on this site coincide with a market that effectively is a “do nothing” market. We are basically flat over the last 13 years, meaning that there hasn’t been growth in the indexes since 1998.
The money that an index investor would have earned (i.e. if you put $100,000 in the SPY ETF or a mutual fund such as Vanguard’s VFINX) would have come through dividends, which averaged about 2% / year during the period. Thus every year you received $2,000 in dividends (taxable each year) which means over the 13 year period you made roughly $30,000 (adding in compounding of interest) before taxes or maybe $24,000 after taxes depending on your bracket (and whether or not the 15% dividend received deduction applied during the period).
This is reflected in our results; while valuations fluctuate about 1/2 the total return of portfolio one, our longest lasting portfolio at over 10 years, is due to dividends. When we look to select stocks a strong (and sustainable) dividend yield is an important, although not the only factor we look for in the “list of six stocks” that we pick from each year.
In the October 24, 2011 issue of Barron’s there is an article titled “It’s Cheaper the Second Time Around” that discusses the fact that indexes have been flat for the last 13 years.
The fact that we are struggling daily to hold above a level first reached nearly 13 years ago is both sobering and, viewed in the proper light, profoundly encouraging for true long-term investors… we are finally returning to a time of ‘stocks for the long run’… anyone who believes in mean-reversion investing has to consider the current starting point for equities at least somewhat attractive…
Jim Paulsen of Wells Capital was kind enough to calculate the 10-year forward return from all points in historry when the market was flat or down over the priod 12 yars. The result: a 7.2% annual gain, versus 4.7% for all other times, not including dividends.
It is good that this analysis disclaimed the impact of dividends and yet noted that they are important, although if the yield is relatively consistent over time (which isn’t true, since yields go down when stocks go up, and vice versa) the analysis should hold true.
This type of investing approach is also a version of “market timing” – you should buy when items are cheap, and sell when they are expensive. The most obvious example of this is housing; if you bought in 2007-8 you probably are regretting it right now – that same house probably would cost you a lot less to buy in 2011 then it did back then, for the same exact house. It isn’t obvious HOW to do market timing, but the effects are real for anyone struggling to pay on an underwater mortgage today.
Like every good investment analogy, there is a counterpoint – Japan. Japan peaked long ago, in 1989, and still hasn’t recovered to the highs. In order to be a long-run investor in Japan you apparently have to be very patient, indeed. Of course at some point investors are entering the market and they don’t care about recovering 1989 highs anyways.
For our portfolios here at the site flat returns mean a few things:
1) we don’t feel so bad at our struggles to raise values since the market has been poised against us
2) we have been right to focus on dividends, since they have been the only reliable source of cash over the period (relative to stock values)
3) while the analysis is more complex many of the overseas indexes weren’t flat over the same time frame; we have been putting up almost 1/2 our picks from overseas companies (US based ADR’s to keep it simple) in that same time frame
4) there is some hope that our patience will be rewarded if values increase in the next decade