Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-20-2018, 02:55 PM   #81
Moderator
sengsational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,520
It seems to me that stable dividend stocks might have a beta that's lower than those of the general market. Especially "boring" stocks who's dividend yield is "good" and who's history of maintaining the dividend in down markets is "good".

People aren't going to bid those stocks up, because they're not going anywhere. And people won't bid them down too far, because the yield would get out of whack.

This is not to say that over some span of time, other things might beat this kind of stock. In fact, by definition (in general), the higher the risk, the higher the reward. So certainly if you're willing to take more risk, you'll be rewarded better than the risk level of, say, a stable dividend stock.
sengsational is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 01-20-2018, 03:20 PM   #82
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
USGrant1962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: DC area
Posts: 1,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruceski44 View Post
Here's the crux of it. I'm having a lot of trouble understanding how my goal could be silly and unhelpful. What could be less silly and more helpful than getting my required income, through thick and thin, without touching the principal?
But your principal goes down by the amount of dividend the day it goes ex-dividend (give or take some market noise).
__________________
FI and Semi-ER March 24, 2017
Consulting to stay engaged

"All models are wrong, some are useful." - George Box
“There is always a well-known solution to every human problem: neat, plausible, and wrong.” - H.L. Mencken
USGrant1962 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 03:23 PM   #83
Moderator
sengsational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by USGrant1962 View Post
But your principal goes down by the amount of dividend the day it goes ex-dividend (give or take some market noise).
But it's a saw-tooth pattern...it typically ratchets back up by the time it's time for the next ex-date.
sengsational is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 03:31 PM   #84
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixonge View Post
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/di...016-2016-09-06

I may be missing something, but I can't find it yet. Seems legit... looks at total return, which should include dividends from both.

It would take some digging to figure out this investment (do you want to do the digging? I've been on far too many wild goose chases to be very motivated to try to sort it out), it looks like this is someone's stock picks to make up this portfolio - is it truly picks that were publicly made in 1996, and updated publicly, or maybe some selective back-testing with a pinch of survivor-bias thrown in? Heck, if it's legit, I'm interested.

But as I've said before, if there is a system to outperforming, someone should start a fund and beat the pants off the market. Oh, someone did do that (well, the first part anyhow):

Quote:
Investing in the Dividend Aristocrats

If you like the idea of the Dividend Aristocrats, you’re still faced with the choice of picking stocks, or buying shares of an exchange traded fund that tracks the index, or both. One way to invest in the entire index is to buy shares of the ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF NOBL
And since inception, NOBL has.... slightly underperformed the market

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/...location24_3=8

-ERD50
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 03:38 PM   #85
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruceski44 View Post
I just took an hour to collate and post the all time dividend payment reliability of a few DGI stocks. That's all I care about! Will the dividend payments hold up in the next whatever? I'm not sure what else I need to show you, so I wish you well and am out.
I've seen this line of reasoning by many dividend growth investors, and though I personally could not structure my portfolio in this way, I can appreciate how it works for others.

This simply means that your investment objective is income generation. For me, it leans more towards capital preservation...and so I do not want to see that bottom line on my statement going lower at any time.

I don't think that there is anything wrong with your approach, so long as you are comfortable with it, and clearly you are...that is all that really matters.
njhowie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 03:47 PM   #86
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
dixonge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: On the road
Posts: 1,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
And since inception, NOBL has.... slightly underperformed the market

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/...location24_3=8

-ERD50
I've seen some references to NOBL and equal weighting (or lack thereof) but it's difficult to find details on a lot of this. I've neither the time nor patience to continue right now...
dixonge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 09:29 PM   #87
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,593
Oh, let's see if I can close this out...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruceski44 View Post
If I don't have to touch the principal then why would I care what its value is? Portfolio loses 50% in the next GFC? I don't care as long as my DI holds up! I think most people can easily relate the two thoughts -- if they are not being obstinate. ...
Sorry, but that's a meaningless construct. If I do a mirror image, I think you'd agree. I could say (but won't, other then to illustrate):
Why would I care if my portfolio pays zero dividends, as long as my value holds up to my withdrawals! I think most people can easily relate the two thoughts -- if they are not being obstinate.
There are some div payers who dried up, stopped paying divs and went to $zero. There are some growth stocks who paid no divs, and dried up and went to $zero. There are no guarantees.

Value is important, to ignore it is putting your head in the sand. Don't forget that divs are just the company selling off its assets, a Quarter at a time. If they didn't issue the div, all else being equal, their stock price would go up by the amount of retained divs (and I could sell that stock if I wanted). And this is seen in the market over and over again - review the concept of "buying the distribution or dividend" as it pertains to mutual funds - same concept as stocks, but more apparent since it often has an entire year rolled into one transaction. Explained here in terms of taxes, but the important part is that they show how the dividend is just reflected in the price.

https://investor.vanguard.com/invest...uying-dividend

Quote:
Imagine you're interested in buying shares of an investment currently trading at $50 a share. The investment is about to pay a $2-per-share dividend.

Let's say you buy 100 shares for $5,000. On the day the dividend is paid, the market value of each share drops to $48, leaving your share value at $4,800. But you've earned $200 in dividends, which means you're even. So far, so good?
So $48 of stock + $2 dividend, or $50 worth of stock. The difference is you've got more flexibility if it is embedded in the stock price. That may not be a big advantage, depending on factors, but I see almost no advantage in having them force the sale on you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruceski44 View Post
... It seems like your mind is wrapped around the axle of portfolio value. ...
No, my head is wrapped around total value, because that is what matters, not 48+2 versus 50.

Quote:
Originally Posted by njhowie View Post
... I don't think that there is anything wrong with your approach, so long as you are comfortable with it, and clearly you are...that is all that really matters.
Agreed. Right up until the point someone starts claiming this approach is clearly superior. I don't see the evidence for it. It's a choice, not a clearly superior one.

Now if someone can show me a defined method that can be replicated and has a history of picking stocks that provide a superior total return, I don't give a whip if they pay dividends or not, I'm interested. But that seems sooooo elusive.

Over and out? Hopefully?

-ERD50
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 05:08 AM   #88
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 10,252
I used the dividends from my VTI (total US stock market) to pay my property taxes. Does that mean I am a dividend growth investor instead of a total return investor?

Upthread it was mentioned that a total return investor had to sell shares to get money. That is not necessarily true.
LOL! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 05:46 AM   #89
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
target2019's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Stuck in the mud somewhere in the NJ swamp
Posts: 7,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruceski44 View Post
For the benefit of others, there's no secret sauce here, and no fund that I'm aware of. I do own VDIGX as it provides exposure to some large-cap dividend payers I don't own, but I'm not bragging about VDIGX with its 2% payout. A solid DGI portfolio can be created by anyone willing to consult the DRIP investing website I referenced earlier and doing their own due diligence to determine entry points and diversification.
Bruce,
Some have more time than others to argue the finer points of dividend investing. And it's pretty much a dogma fight, IMO. If you have time to watch stocks, that is fine. I do this from time to time, but work has intervened (long story).

I manage in-laws money. He had purchased Bell, Verizon, etc. It morphed into AT&T, VZ, Comcast, etc. Some of the other spinoffs failed. However, the core VZ and T in the account now is something else, throwing off dividends like clockwork. Why he did this, I do not know. But I know a working clock when I see one.

My lazy approach, in our investments, is to buy SCHD. I discovered that I have no ability to analyze stocks. I may get in the DRIP game, but for now it is SCHD.

Bulk of our investments are in low-cost mutual funds, about 50/50 AA
target2019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 06:43 AM   #90
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
Upthread it was mentioned that a total return investor had to sell shares to get money. That is not necessarily true.
Serious question not a challenge: How is this so?
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 06:47 AM   #91
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 10,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
Serious question not a challenge: How is this so?
The total return investor does not need to re-invest dividends. Since all mutual funds and ETFs that I would ever own pay dividends, there is no way to get around not receiving dividends. During the accumulation phase, dividends can be reinvested, but during the withdrawal phase, dividends can be spent.

An investor doesn't need special stocks or mutual funds with "Dividend" in their names to get dividends.

Both the Total Return investor and the Dividend Growth Investor can sell shares any time they want to as well.
LOL! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 07:24 AM   #92
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 869
I’m surprised no one mentioned that the general 60/40 or 50/50 AA has always been mentioned as the proven method to moderate total value and loss of shares in a bear market. Sales are of bonds during that time, which are less affected or grow during that period, allowing purchase of the depressed equities during the downtown or as the source of income from sale. Sale of equities resumes when the market recovers.

I can see the allure of Divs for income for anyone that has less stomach for volatility. The generally predicted income allows less monitoring of total portfolio value and any decision making, at a cost of lower total value growth and the subsequent loss of income through the sales of that growth. Most people are not comfortable making the decisions of what to sell and what to keep. While ERD sees it as marginally more effort, many see as monumentally more effort. That’s a decision based on skill set, not absolute numbers. The angst for many many people of staying the course during a prolonged bear can not be understated. Only in hindsight does it seem to have been the more obvious choice.

The 4% rule was borne out of covering an income for 30 year retirement based on the markets overall performance. I doubt sincerely that the fact that relying on dividends only for income, is basically the equivalent of an SWR of basically 3.5% and a 100% success rate. As ERD mentioned, if it was even marginally superior, those funds would be runaway winners. For any short term given period, they are roughly the same. The difference is that assuming no human based interference, total index based growth trumps dividends. But people being people, many panic at different times and sell during downturns. This is, afterall, what drives much of a stocks drop in price. Poor timing of sales and relutance to return to the market has always shown to severly depress an individuals ROR to well below what typically staying the course would be for with dividend players returns, but at the same time enhances the ROR of individuals that stay the course for total portfolio value in the long term, by purchasing during the lows and cost averaging. Selectively selling stock when a stock is only up, and bonds when they are down, would always beat the equities market alone. Else many more people could prove that a 100/0 AA is always superior.

IMHO, it boils down to what an individual has more faith in: the idea that a roughly 3.5% WR from the market based on the faith that indexed funds fornthe general market will always be cyclically rising such that sales of that stacked growth either accumulated and/or that recovery afterwards yields a perpetual portfolio value OR that the companies of 3,5% div paying stocks will do a better job long term with their own concerns and THEY do the work of determining their WR and maintaining their value per share.

The charts all generally show, that with 20/20 hindsight, selling off index based equities yield more income based on sales than dividends do. But there is the whole subset of thinking that THIS time around, and for the future, be cause we are in unchartered waters (DOW significantly above the inflation adjusted historical value, global economy, high speed computer trading) that market volatility will not resemble anything at all like the years previous to 2000, and the FIRECALC like past performance assumptions are invalid for future generalizations.

I know that I have a hard time grasping that the economy and associated Stock Market bears any relevance in comparison from 1900 to 1980 and then from 1990 to present. The information Age has changed that paradigm forever.
Perryinva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 07:32 AM   #93
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Mr._Graybeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
It would take some digging to figure out this investment (do you want to do the digging? I've been on far too many wild goose chases to be very motivated to try to sort it out), it looks like this is someone's stock picks to make up this portfolio - is it truly picks that were publicly made in 1996, and updated publicly, or maybe some selective back-testing with a pinch of survivor-bias thrown in? Heck, if it's legit, I'm interested.

But as I've said before, if there is a system to outperforming, someone should start a fund and beat the pants off the market. Oh, someone did do that (well, the first part anyhow):

And since inception, NOBL has.... slightly underperformed the market

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/...location24_3=8

-ERD50
Try SCHD vs. VTI. Edit: Duh, never mind, I'm reading the chart backwards. Too early for me to be posting!
Mr._Graybeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 08:48 AM   #94
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
The total return investor does not need to re-invest dividends. Since all mutual funds and ETFs that I would ever own pay dividends, there is no way to get around not receiving dividends. During the accumulation phase, dividends can be reinvested, but during the withdrawal phase, dividends can be spent.

An investor doesn't need special stocks or mutual funds with "Dividend" in their names to get dividends.

Both the Total Return investor and the Dividend Growth Investor can sell shares any time they want to as well.
Oh ok. That's what I do but I don't consider myself a TR investor; my eyes lean toward dividends and all my funds pay dividends but some of them are growth funds.
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 09:23 AM   #95
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perryinva View Post
I’m surprised no one mentioned that the general 60/40 or 50/50 AA has always been mentioned as the proven method to moderate total value and loss of shares in a bear market. Sales are of bonds during that time, which are less affected or grow during that period, allowing purchase of the depressed equities during the downtown or as the source of income from sale. Sale of equities resumes when the market recovers. ....
Very nice post, let me expand on a few small points...

I think bonds weren't mentioned much because this was a debate about relative performance of high-div stocks versus the broader market. I did a few of those charts with a 50-50 AA, and it didn't really change the story, both sides were affected about the same, so I didn't bother to maybe 'muddy the waters'.

But I agree totally, bonds will be there to sell on a downturn, stocks will be preserved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perryinva View Post
...I can see the allure of Divs for income for anyone that has less stomach for volatility. The generally predicted income allows less monitoring of total portfolio value and any decision making, at a cost of lower total value growth and the subsequent loss of income through the sales of that growth. Most people are not comfortable making the decisions of what to sell and what to keep. While ERD sees it as marginally more effort, many see as monumentally more effort. ...
Except the charts we've posted do not show that the high-divs have significantly less volatility.

True, what I describe as marginally more effort (a once-per-year sale decision), some may see as a big deal. But I think that is a very small number of people, and there are alternatives. And it also seems that most of the pro-div people here are selecting individual stocks, monitoring some parameters and selling and buying based on the outlook for future div flow. That must be far more work than an annual sale based on desired withdraw minus div withdraws.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perryinva View Post
... I know that I have a hard time grasping that the economy and associated Stock Market bears any relevance in comparison from 1900 to 1980 and then from 1990 to present. The information Age has changed that paradigm forever.
While the future may well be different from the past, I see no reason to assume any one approach would be better than another in this unknown future. While true, it doesn't seem relevant to an analysis of div-payers versus broad market.


Quote:
Originally Posted by target2019 View Post
Bruce,
Some have more time than others to argue the finer points of dividend investing. And it's pretty much a dogma fight, IMO. ...
I honestly don't want to belabor this, but I just can't let that comment stand. The definition of dogma is to accept/defend something in the absence of evidence, or when the evidence is contrary to the belief. Those of us saying there isn't any big advantage to div-payers have presented evidence. The only evidence we have from the div-payer crowd is with a self-selected group of stocks, and that isn't meaningful unless there is some objective, rule-based process for selecting those stocks - one that can be duplicated by an investor w/o too much effort. So WADR, it isn't a "dogma fight", it is dogma on one side, evidence on the other.

Time to review some of the OP (with emphasis):

Quote:
I've read several thread comments about investing in stocks that provide consistent dividends. The commenters often mention withdrawing the dividend payouts as an annual income stream.

These comments usually involve listing some of the best dividend paying stocks.

I prefer to avoid purchasing individual stocks
. Are there mutual funds that focus on dividend paying stocks? .....

- As long as I'm bringing this topic up, is this a good idea?
Well, the charts say that the div-paying funds/ETFs don't act much different from a broad-index fund. So probably no big deal to do it or not do it, but I don't think I could label it a "good idea", just an alternative.

edit/add: I see the OP has not posted since this question. I wonder if they got anything from this?

-ERD50
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 10:00 AM   #96
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 733
Anyone have a procedure to automatically trade on dividend yield changes?
Luck_Club is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 10:41 AM   #97
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 869
Excellent points ERD. In the comparisons of Divs vs TV, you are correct about future predictably in the general “know one knows” sense. But (and I’m not a div person per se, though I am weighted in utilities) I think that most Div preferred investors would argue that most aristocrat div stocks have less volitility and less chance of a total meltdown compared to new kids on the block general funds. GE is a prime example of how wrong that can be. And most of the Div people here seem to claim a “buy it and leave it if it is maintaining or growing” position, and prefer the automatic quarterly influx. The granularity at that level is more comfortable. Charts (especially historical) never show the whole picture. In hindsight, many stocks appear far more sure footed and “how could I have missed that” average performance. But on a live granular experience they are often far from that. Too much information updates hourly can lead to a totally wrong representation. I have not seen, but suspect, that a comparison of noble div paying stocks volatility to index volatility, the extremes are far less for the Div payers, regardless of the actual NV and performance.

I’m not a good investor. But compared to most people I know, I’m a freaking genius, ( not here by any stretch) only because my returns during this bull have been on the low side of what is typical here, like 16% overall per year the last 2 years. 2015 stunk (about 5%), but 2013 & 14 were stellar as well. The difference is I keep pouring in money (still working), with a general long term mindset and stay in. We all know people that got out in 2012 because “ the crash is imminent “ mentality, and never got back in. I can easily show that had I put the vast majority in an S&P index for the last 10 years, I would be well ahead. Instead, I take some educated guesses and end up with some vastly better than and some vastly lower than the S&P with the average being under.

I know plenty of bright, intelligent people at work that are financial morons. I have to constantly watch what I say and keep my thoughts to myself unless asked. I know 2 different engineers that never even took the 3/6 401k match because they knew they could do better investing outside the 401k, yet actually never got around to doing just that, or lost much of it (real estate, sure things etc) . They are both back working after retiring because of that one simple decision. And I know many more that put everything always in to company stock, never considered a safe move. In our case, that actually was the best performer of all the funds if one looks at the last 25 years. I did the dutifully diversified thing and ended up with an overall lower return vs them.

I would venture to say that whatever keeps you invested and not panicking or selling at the wrong time is the best choice. There is less selling by the Div crowd, so that alone could be the performance edge vs them only looking at Total value.
Perryinva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 11:05 AM   #98
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 363
I'm a dividend aristocrat investor due to continually increasing dividend, stability of the companies on the list, and I don't invest in companies that have a higher than 50% payout ratio. To be on the dividend aristocrat list a company must have increased it's dividend over the past 25 years. The list is updated yearly. There have been some significant changes over the years: in 2009 the list was reduced from 52 to 42 companies. In 2010, another 10 companies were dropped from the list (including GE). The history of the dividend aristocrat list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%26P_...nd_Aristocrats
Al18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 11:14 AM   #99
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 3,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
And why did you think that?

Based on my earlier scans, I didn't expect to see that, and I didn't. In these screen-shots, I ran the mouse over the VTI line to make it stand out - (pay no attention to the numbers in the box, those are specific to the date the mouse was at, and I just moved it so the box would be out of the way of the ending lines). In each case, VTI was in the middle or near the top.

I'm not cherry-picking data, those are your dates. I chose the first 5 divs I found with histories that go back a few years.

Here ya go. What do you see?

-ERD50

Well when I look at the VIG and VTI for the period 12-27-2007 through 12-30-2010, I see that VTI lost about 53% start to market trough 3-6-2009, and VIG lost 44%.

If you follow through the end of the periods selected, VIG had higher total return, losing about 1% versus loss of 6.5% for VTI. (I double-checked these using Morningstar).

So maybe your point is these differences are not meaningful?
Montecfo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 11:17 AM   #100
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GravitySucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Syracuse
Posts: 3,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by njhowie View Post
Bingo!



The 2.75% CD has no risk, you will get it all back at maturity. What guarantees have you got with the fund?


Huge risk. Even if you're lucky that dollar will be worth about eighty eight cents when you redeem the CD.
__________________
“No, not rich. I am a poor man with money, which is not the same thing"
GravitySucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
When to sell dividend paying stocks tcaron20 Active Investing, Market Strategies & Alternative Assets 50 02-10-2017 10:01 AM
Help setting up a dividend paying portfolio calichica Young Dreamers 21 12-02-2013 04:26 PM
Dividend paying Stocks swodo FIRE and Money 117 08-26-2011 07:52 AM
Ultimate Dividend Playbook; Dividend Harvest Portfolio FUEGO FIRE and Money 22 08-12-2008 11:16 AM
Suggestions on Dividend Paying ETFs? camberiu FIRE and Money 5 01-15-2007 04:44 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:03 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.