Passive income from dividends. Is it a mistake?

sprite09

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2020
1,221
598
113
On average the total returns on pure equity stocks is better than pure dividend stocks. If you factor in tax treatment of capital gains vs qualified dividends, pure equity stocks still put more money in your pocket on average.

If reliable cashflow is the priority then dividend stocks have their place but GICs and bonds are more reliable albeit lower total returns on average and tax treatment on interest is usually the worst.

Now might be a good time to get into dividend stocks like BCE and Enbridge as those companies require intense capital investment that is financed through debt and interest rates are falling. You could be collecting that sweet 8.65% BCE dividend and the stock appreciates significantly from the drop in interest rates.
"On average the total returns on pure equity stocks is better than pure dividend stocks. If you factor in tax treatment of capital gains vs qualified dividends, pure equity stocks still put more money in your pocket on average."

Whichever gives the lowest effective tax rate depends on a myriad of factors, such as income level, potential clawbacks, etc. In general, if you're in the higher tax brackets (and everyone appears to be a millionaire on Terb, LOL), capital gains are preferable.

Using an extreme example, billionaires don't want dividends, because it forces them to pay taxes on cash they don't need. When, say, Bezos decides he wants to buy a yacht or travel to space, he'll sell some shares.

Lots of pro-dividend investors use Warren Buffett as a counterargument, but Buffet doesn't base his investment decisions on dividends (he made it clear in Berkshire's 2012 letter to shareholders)--he's a value investor who buys solid, but undervalued (his opinion) stocks. And, he prefers more established, mature companies, which tend to pay dividends. Because he likes low prices, it makes it seem he prefers to buy high-dividend yield stocks, but it's just a coincidence--he cares about total return.

"If reliable cashflow is the priority then dividend stocks have their place..."

Yeah, it's the "bird-in-hand" argument aka uncertainty resolution by dividend investors--another reason dividend investors prefer dividends because they're more predictable than capital gains. But, as you implicitly said, what really matters is total return--that is, how much money you actually end up having.

Looks like so-called "blue-chip" stocks are really popular on Terb, like BCE, Rogers, Big Banks, etc. I'll use BCE as an example since there a popular thread on it on Terb--yeah, the stock has a high dividend yield, but that's because it's been tanking. Over the past FIVE years, it's essentially flat (actually slightly down) on a total return basis, while the TSX is up almost 40 percent (sites like Ycharts can give you the total return, and not just the capital gain/loss return).

Sure, the TSX index fund mainly doesn't generate explicit cash flows, so you'd have to sell some shares to generate your own cash flow/dividend, but at the end of the day, you have more money in your bank account.

Then to outperform the TSX or whatever market index, then you'd have to construct a portfolio of dividend-paying stocks that outperform (i.e., stock pick). Not saying it's impossible, but the odds are not in one's favour to outperform the market, especially over time (5+ years). And, based on some of the posts here (e.g., people complaining about the stock performance of BCE, TD, etc.; people panic-selling Tesla in late 2022, etc.), I'd venture to say most people here haven't beat the market over 5+ years. If they have, they likely took on additional risk for which they were compensated for. I doubt anybody here who actually outperformed the market strictly on a return basis (not factoring in risk) actually calculated their risk-adjusted return using, say, the Sharpe or Treynor ratio.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

Ceiling Cat

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2009
28,720
1,457
113
Looks like so-called "blue-chip" stocks are really popular on Terb, like BCE, Rogers, Big Banks, etc.
These "blue-chip" stocks are popular because the probability is on your side in the long run. One reason is that these stocks also pay a substantial dividend. The ones that pay a dividend and increase the dividend regularly are called Aristocrat stocks, ( Google Canadian Aristocrat stocks ) these are the most desirable buy and hold stocks. I hold TRP and ENB.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: rajput

sprite09

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2020
1,221
598
113
These "blue-chip" stocks are popular because the probability is on your side in the long run. One reason is that these stocks also pay a substantial dividend. The ones that pay a dividend and increase the dividend regularly are called Aristocrat stocks, ( Google Canadian Aristocrat stocks ) these are the most desirable buy and hold stocks. I hold TRP and ENB.
I'm well aware of the Aristocrat indices, but then it goes back to my point of stock picking and total returns.
 

bdybldr

Active member
Jul 28, 2007
337
92
28
T.O.
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

themaxx

Member
May 13, 2014
86
33
18

Thanks for this, but what I originally asked for was if someone could "pull up a chart comparing any, or all, of the big 5 Cdn Banks to the TSE for say, the past 30 years. Post the chart here & we can all discuss. Maybe also throw in BCE and ENB, for fun."
I find it hard to believe that no-one knows how to do that.
 

sprite09

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2020
1,221
598
113
Thanks for this, but what I originally asked for was if someone could "pull up a chart comparing any, or all, of the big 5 Cdn Banks to the TSE for say, the past 30 years. Post the chart here & we can all discuss. Maybe also throw in BCE and ENB, for fun."
I find it hard to believe that no-one knows how to do that.
use tradingview
 
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

ValuedSupporter

Active member
Apr 27, 2024
250
208
43
@HungSowel

Dividends come out of after-tax income, it is already taxed at the Corporate tax rate before you get the dividend. If you do not take this into account before you invest then you are retarded.

OH my dear fucking god. Of COURSE dividends are paid out after profits. No shit. This is why we have the Dividend Tax Credit. Are you some Chinese troll based in Peking?


Suppose you get 1k in dividends, the corporation had to earn ~1.25k pre-taxed income to pay the 1k in dividends. Alternatively, the corporation could have spent the money doing a stock buyback, stock buyback is done using pre-taxed income and a reasonable assumption (the only reasonable assumption one can make) is that the stock buyback will appreciate your stock position by 1.25k.

Bell Canada's Tax payment policy is absolutely irrelevant. I purchcase a share of BCE $46.57 to get their $3.99 dividend per share worth 8.58%. Until about $135, 000 that Canadian dividend is taxed significantly less than a capital gain. This has been shown & referenced multiple times but you continue to ignore that and make the same arguments over and over again.

Would you rather have 1k in dividends or 1.25k in capital gains?

OhOh Oh Oh Oh Oh , please show me where I'm going to get 1.25 in Capital Gains from Bell Canada? You can't because you never reference your information. You know jack/shit and make things up as you go along.

How about would you like a Dividend Tax Credit that provides substantial tax credits that you can apply against Income to reduce your overall taxation? No?

is that the stock buyback will appreciate your stock position by 1.25k.
There is no guarantee that the stock will be worth more within 6 months. This is THE MOST DUMBIST argument I've heard yet from the Youtube Investor gang. Guaranteed Returns hahahahahahahhaa

Tell you what. Read Investing 101
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

ValuedSupporter

Active member
Apr 27, 2024
250
208
43
that company could have put that money back into their own business to earn a higher return for its shareholders.
ahahahahaah, "COULD".

ONLY if the company actually had new business or projects to fund AND if the return on those projects were worth it.

It's REALLY apparent you haven't worked in any sort of Corporate finance or business.
 
Last edited:

ValuedSupporter

Active member
Apr 27, 2024
250
208
43
Yes--theories by Miller and Modigliani (homemade dividends being one of them) are always in entry-level corporate finance textbooks, but only sometimes mentioned in more advanced texts, depending on the course (because it is assumed the student already learned it in first or second-year finance).
ah....M&M. It's been years since I've heard those names...
 

ValuedSupporter

Active member
Apr 27, 2024
250
208
43
On average the total returns on pure equity stocks is better than pure dividend stocks. If you factor in tax treatment of capital gains vs qualified dividends, pure equity stocks still put more money in your pocket on average.
Just stop saying stupid shit that you heard on Youtube. Actually provide references for your statements. You'll find out how often you're wrong Per below, The S&P500 (and many other indexes) rates of return are better with re-invested dividends.

If you're going to say, "Bruh, individual stocks" then you're just cherry picking data to suite your argument. I mean, GOOD LUCK even beating the index with your "pure equity" stocks since about 70% of professionals cannot beat the index. Given your posts, I'm pretty sure you can't either.

I'm also waiting for "oh but if they didn't pay dividends the S&P500 would be higher". No, that's called fantasy and lying because you don't know that. You're being hopeful and making shit up to suite your argument...

1722473750718.png
Example RBC. Plain old boring dividend stock. With dividends, average total return of 15% since 1995. You're more than welcome to pick stocks that you like and, over the long run say since 1995, you'll see which basket of stocks do better.

Same with all the banks. Same with ENB. Same with FTS. Same with EMA. and so on.


1722474003472.png

You really have no credibility.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

ValuedSupporter

Active member
Apr 27, 2024
250
208
43
"On average the total returns on pure equity stocks is better than pure dividend stocks. If you factor in tax treatment of capital gains vs qualified dividends, pure equity stocks still put more money in your pocket on average."

Whichever gives the lowest effective tax rate depends on a myriad of factors, such as income level, potential clawbacks, etc. In general, if you're in the higher tax brackets (and everyone appears to be a millionaire on Terb, LOL), capital gains are preferable.


Then to outperform the TSX or whatever market index, then you'd have to construct a portfolio of dividend-paying stocks that outperform (i.e., stock pick). Not saying it's impossible, but the odds are not in one's favour to outperform the market, especially over time (5+ years). And, based on some of the posts here (e.g., people complaining about the stock performance of BCE, TD, etc.; people panic-selling Tesla in late 2022, etc.), I'd venture to say most people here haven't beat the market over 5+ years. If they have, they likely took on additional risk for which they were compensated for. I doubt anybody here who actually outperformed the market strictly on a return basis (not factoring in risk) actually calculated their risk-adjusted return using, say, the Sharpe or Treynor ratio.
This is true that average (not marginal) Capital Gains are taxed more favorably. This happens around $130K-ish average. However, given that it's likely..what...80% of the Canadian population won't have invested enough to reach this point, I'd say it's a good recommendation to invest in dividends versus capital gains in general.

There is an exception though. I brute forced a spreadsheet that shows IF a person starts investing in mid-40s and later, investing for dividends is the way to go for income. HOWEVER, if they're starting investing below mid-40s, capital gains (and selling for income) is much much better due to the on-going taxation of dividends pre-retirement.

As for outperformance compared to indexes with your own basket of stocks, the SPIVA report is the one you're looking for. That is, most experts cannot beat the index and a large percentage (70%?) under-perform.

1722474665064.png
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

sprite09

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2020
1,221
598
113
Just stop saying stupid shit that you heard on Youtube. Actually provide references for your statements. You'll find out how often you're wrong Per below, The S&P500 (and many other indexes) rates of return are better with re-invested dividends.

If you're going to say, "Bruh, individual stocks" then you're just cherry picking data to suite your argument. I mean, GOOD LUCK even beating the index with your "pure equity" stocks since about 70% of professionals cannot beat the index. Given your posts, I'm pretty sure you can't either.

I'm also waiting for "oh but if they didn't pay dividends the S&P500 would be higher". No, that's called fantasy and lying because you don't know that. You're being hopeful and making shit up to suite your argument...

View attachment 347228
Example RBC. Plain old boring dividend stock. With dividends, average total return of 15% since 1995. You're more than welcome to pick stocks that you like and, over the long run say since 1995, you'll see which basket of stocks do better.

Same with all the banks. Same with ENB. Same with FTS. Same with EMA. and so on.


View attachment 347230

You really have no credibility.
Indeed, with reinvestment. I think many people in general think they're free money and thus do not reinvest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

sprite09

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2020
1,221
598
113
This is true that average (not marginal) Capital Gains are taxed more favorably. This happens around $130K-ish average. However, given that it's likely..what...80% of the Canadian population won't have invested enough to reach this point, I'd say it's a good recommendation to invest in dividends versus capital gains in general.

There is an exception though. I brute forced a spreadsheet that shows IF a person starts investing in mid-40s and later, investing for dividends is the way to go for income. HOWEVER, if they're starting investing below mid-40s, capital gains (and selling for income) is much much better due to the on-going taxation of dividends pre-retirement.

As for outperformance compared to indexes with your own basket of stocks, the SPIVA report is the one you're looking for. That is, most experts cannot beat the index and a large percentage (70%?) under-perform.

View attachment 347232
LOL, yeah, and of course average Joe on Terb thinks he can outperform. Like I said, not impossible, but unlikely, especially over the long-term.

Yeah, regarding taxes, it's a tricky one as it depends on so many factors (especially if you wanna avoid gov't clawbacks), and you threw in another one regarding dividends vs capital gains pre-retirement. I was going by the assumption for retired people who are super wealthy, which is apparently a lot of people here, LOL.

Another thing for investors focused on CANADIAN dividend-paying stocks (due to the DTC) to take note of is that it greatly limits your opportunity set (Canadian equities are already peanuts in terms of global equities to begin with) and thus excessive idiosyncratic risk (less diversification).
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts