ERD50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
OP,
I am doing similar. I believe that Div payers are part of a total return portfolio.
....
Many dividend paying naysayers do not take into account the yield on cost and long term holding aspect of dividend paying assets (including the forbes author). Further, you can find just as many articles promoting dividend investing.
I am not a "dividend naysayer", I accept the dividends that come as part of a diversified portfolio (like VTI - Total US Market).
But I don't like the idea of investing only in div payers, that is making it harder to be as diversified as the Total US Market, and I've seen no evidence of any advantage (on the contrary, my research into div payers show they under-perform by all meaningful measures, including volatility).
Call it semantics, but I dislike the term "total return portfolio". All portfolios deliver a "total return" - it is a measurement, not a description of the portfolio. It's like saying I have a square foot house, all houses can be measured in square feet.
Show us some data - how can someone on this forum easily invest in a diversified group of div payers that show a historical advantage over VTI? If it's true, it should be easy to educate us on these touted advantages. Data, not stories.
I don't care how many articles promote something, show me the data.
-ERD50
Last edited: