Top 5 Reasons Why Dividend Investing Over ETF


Sign

All right, that’s it! Those ETF bullies have tormented us dividend stock pickers long enough. I’m retaliating. My headgear is on. My gloves are strapped. Give me your best shot.

1. Less MER - In fact, buy-and-hold dividend investors pay no MER at all. Regrettably, iShares CDN LargeCap 60 ETF (XIU.to) and TD Canadian Index eSeries seize 0.17% and 0.31% respectively. Which means, dividend investors have a 0.17% to 0.31% head start each and every year.

2. More Diversified - Most investors refer to the other types of diversification: by sectors and by geographical locations. This is a non-issue for investors with 30 or more stocks. As long as your eggs are properly spread amongst different baskets, the portfolio will achieve similar volatility as the general market. At least one study found that 90% of the unsystematic risk can be diversified away with as little as 12 stocks.

Sure, diversification does alleviate uncertainties in a portfolio due to particular sectors or countries, but there is a much bigger monster in the room, and that is market sentiment. No matter how much you slice and dice your portfolio, all sectors are still subject to market sentiment. The past few months are a testament of how every sector limps along while the market is howling over its PMS. No one can escape the carnage. The way I see it, dividend investing is the only remedy to help us cruise through the turbulence while remaining fully invested in the stock market. Just look at Bank of Nova Scotia. It’s basically the same old boring bank as yesterday, last week, last month, last quarter and last year, but its 1 year chart resembles 6-flags roller coaster. All that while, their distribution policy is steady as she goes.

So, dividend investing offers you another dimension of diversification by easing reliant on market speculations, and rewarding you with real hard cash straight from the operations of your high-caliber businesses.

3. More Tax Efficient - A $35,000 salaried British Columbian profiting from a $5,000 capital gain must pony up an extra $615 in taxes. The same British Columbian receiving a $5,000 dividend would pocket a $175 tax refund. (That’s almost enough to pick up 4 more BNS shares!) So, ETF investors must overcome both the MER and the tax refund every year.

4. Extended Investment Horizon - Due to market sentiment described in point 2, ETF investors must gradually shift their equity exposure toward bond to protect their nest eggs from market volatility. Consequently, a 25 year old ETF investor may only have a 30 to 35 year weighted investment time horizon before reaching 65. This is a double whammy for them: the investments have less time to compound, and the turnovers create tax-drags against the portfolio return. And don’t forget that bonds are taxed as regular income.

On the other hand, dividend investors can prolong a carefully crafted portfolio because dividends are never at the mercy of market turbulence. By sticking to stocks with a history of rising dividends, or businesses that provide essential goods and services, you can afford to hang on to the portfolio longer. I think the best defense is the best offence. If anyone can prolong a dividend portfolio for 40 years, the dividend compounding coupled with the preferential tax treatment will deliver enough capital cushion to hold to the stocks forever.

5. Less Market Timing - Contrary to popular belief, a thoroughly hands off approach to investing is an illusion. Eventually, a retired ETF investor will have to live off his equities. Unless he turns over 100% of his portfolio to bonds (I smell capital gain taxes), the 4% withdrawal rule is going to pinch during bear markets. If hysteria sinks the market down 15%, can he afford to devour another 4% and erode his already undervalued capital? If euphoria drives the market up 15%, should he take out a little more in anticipation of a trend reversal? You see? There are so many crucial market timing decisions. Doesn’t sound to me like a relaxing golden age.

A retired dividend investor doesn’t need to fiddle with his portfolio whether the market is sad or happy, because the dividend stream is more dependable even when the market is tumbling. And courtesy to points 1, 3 and 4, a dividend portfolio should enter retirement with a much larger base and yield, and be able to outpace inflation and cushion any unforeseen dividend cuts.


Further reading: A brief history of high yield stocks

 

Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

Reader Comments

Type yoMER - you would have to be able to buy the stocks with no trading fee to have a zero mfr.

Diversification - so does your 30 stocks include large/mid/small cap, Europe, Asia etc as well?

Horizon - I don’t think so - an ETF investor who has enough money that they can use the 4% rule should be able to handle market turbulence.

Market timing - The fact is that withdrawals from a portfolio INCLUDE dividends so a div investor who has a yield of 4% from his/her portfolio is doing the exact same withdrawal as a ETF investor who does a 4% rule withdrawal by selling shares.

On another note I just bought some BNS at $48 and a touch of CIBC @ $69 as well this week.ur comment here.

1. MER - At Questrade, one can load up the entire 30 stocks with as little as $150. Again, this is a buy&hold strategy. The transaction fee is a one-time cost, therefore the portion of stocks purchased incurs no MER moving forward.

2. A couple of points: (a) many Canadian blue chips have international diversification. Power Financial has Pargesa in Europe, Manulife has operations in China, and subsidiaries (John Hancock) in US. RY, TD and BMO have subsidiaries in US. BNS has operations in South America. Great West has Putnum. Our railway companies have tracks all over North America. And obviously we export our natural resources to all over the world.

(b) The post sticks with the Canadian equity side of things where the dividend tax credit is applicable.

My exposure to Europe is through VAE. US though VV. Small cap though mutual funds.

4. Horizon - Define “enough money”. Does that involve working longer than dividend investors?

There is another key difference between dividend investing and ETF. Dividend investing’s withdrawal is dollar based. On the other hand, the ETF withdrawal is percentage based. The 4% withdrawal on ETF fluctuates with the market. In an extended 5-year bear market, the retirement income will dwindle along with the market in the midst of a rising inflationary environment.

5. Market timing - But dividend investors don’t have to time their withdrawals. These distributions automatically delivered to their bank accounts every month even when the investors are vacationing in Timbuktu. No market timing is involved. However, ETF investors must burden themselves by constantly monitoring the ETF charts praying for attractive exit points. If the market is hurting in January (like this January), should he withdraw the 4% in a hurry, or chance it by hoping for a better result over the remainder of the year?

You hold ETFs in your portfolio. I hold some stocks in mine, so does Mike. So, what exactly do you want to fight about?

No, no fight. Just a fun post.

I don’t hold Canadian ETFs.

As mentioned in my last post, Canadians have no preferential tax treatments from US and international stocks. Which is why I own VV, VAE and VWO.

Having said that, dividend-growth is stock picking by another name and as such has the following risks:
1. Dividends may not keep pace with inflation. Beware of extrapolating the past few years ad infinitum.
2. Yes, you have the chance to outperform the market, but you also run the risk of under performing. If you consistently under perform, a little MER is the least of your worries.
3. Tax efficiency is a bit of a red herring and is true only if you buy stocks and never sell them. Do you mean to say that you have never ever sold a stock as a dividend-growth investor?
4. Don’t forget that ETF investors get dividends too. Yes, it is less than you’d get in a portfolio of dividend stocks but at 2% it’s not irrelevant.
5. I’ve never heard anyone recommending a 65-year old should have no equities. The traditional thumb rule is your age in bonds.
6. You don’t have to sell to rebalance. In asset accumulation years, when adding new money, you can redirect it to assets that are below target.

More diversified - I would argue that the bigger monster in the room is asset allocation. Without considering FI, volatility is still a larger issue that can’t be averaged out by geography.

More tax efficient - you’re assuming all investments are made outside of an RRSP. Investments within an RRSP are still the most tax efficient investment. Considering most of us have small to non-existent pensions and can make contributions of up to 18% of our salaries, you can’t gloss over this issue.

Extended investment horizon & Less Market Timing - I would argue that both the ETF investor and the dividend investor will have to protect their nest egg from the effects of market volatility. A dividend investor with no FI component will need a HUGE portfolio to live solely off dividends unless they include income trusts which brings the volatility issue back to the forefront.

If both the ETF investor and the dividend investor retire using the 4% rule, with the ETF investor selling equities and withdrawing dividends while the div. investor withdraws dividends only, the ETF investor will be able to retire earlier as he or she won’t require as large a portfolio.

I’d happily quit the rat race a few years earlier and have to scrimp a bit during a bear market. But that’s just me…:)

MER - you can’t just calculate the MER starting at a point when it’s convenient for your argument. I agree that buying div stocks through Questrade will produce an MER that is pretty close to (but not exactly) zero. The other thing is that most investors in the accumulation phase will be make periodic trades so again, $100 of trades/year on a $100k portfolio is really good but not zero (yes, I’m being picky).

Diversification - Good point, I forgot about that.

Horizon - enough money is when you can live off the portfolio alone without too much danger of running out of money while you are still alive. I think how long you have to work will be mostly be determined by how much you save and how much your retirement expenses (or needs) are, rather than the type of investor that you are. Another factor is how much of an estate you want to leave.

4% withdrawal on ETF fluctuates with the market That’s not how the 4% rule works although you could do it like that. Next Friday I have a post on the 4% rule.

Market timing - see my post next Friday.

If both the ETF investor and the dividend investor retire using the 4% rule, with the ETF investor selling equities and withdrawing dividends while the div. investor withdraws dividends only, the ETF investor will be able to retire earlier as he or she won’t require as large a portfolio.

Telly I would argue that as far as the 4% rule is concerned, there is no difference as to what type of investments are held in the portfolio. We tend to assume that a dividend investor will live off of whatever dividends are produced from the portfolio. The fact is that the retired dividend investor can still reinvest part of the dividend income if they choose.

Although I do like dividend investing, I don’t think here is one pair shoes suitable for all feet. Any investment strategy has its pros and cons.

For example, regarding to tax efficiency, sure dividend pay less tax than capital gains, but if your investment strategy is buy and hold (as dividend investors claimed), then why can’t it still by buy and hold if you are investing ETF? If you don’t sell it, then no capital gains and no tax at all while you still pay some tax on dividend.

I think a more balanced view would be to analyze the pros and cons of different strategies and people can decide what is the best for their individual situations.

CC -

1. Indirectly speaking, part of the dividend growth *is* inflation, otherwise who is collecting the inflation? However, bonds are guaranteed to fall behind inflation, and both bonds and capital gains are taxed heavily relative to dividends.

2. What is the fascination with beating or keeping up with the market? People retire on annual income, not net worth. MER eats into income, that’s bad. If the stocks are tumbling (regardless if they underperforming the market or not), new savings and dividend income can be reinvested to buy even more TransCanada or Royal Bank shares, and together with tax refunds will accelerate the income growth.

3. I did some rebalancing in 2007, but I don’t expect a high turnover in 2008 or forward. So far this year, I sold a non-dividend paying stock, diversified BMO into CM, and moved an income trust into my RRSP, and that should be it for the year. I’m sure ETF investors will receive a tax bill on the BCE sale.

4. There’s generally a ~2% yield differential between the ETF and a typical dividend portfolio. This market correction has driven XIU’s yield up to 2%. Dividend investors can expect ~4%. In addition, MER eats into ETF distributions. 0.17% MER /2.17% Yield = 7.8% swindled.

5. Either way, it doesn’t change the fact that ETF investors who rely on equity appreciation must unwind equities into bonds sooner than dividend investors whose withdrawals aren’t subject to market volatility.

6. How can new savings outmuscle the ~10% annual appreciation from existing equities?

Telly –

Volatility is in the eye of the beholder. There’s the net worth volatility, and then there’s the income stream volatility. During retirement, income stream stability is more paramount than net worth.

I’m an RRSP advocate. We maxed out our RRSP, but the majority of our investment is in non-registered accounts. Capital gains and bond interests still matter to us, but others are free to write their own top 5 reasons for RRSP.

>>“A dividend investor with no FI component will need a HUGE portfolio to live solely off dividends unless they include income trusts”

Why is that? Most Canadian can earn ~$50k in dividends tax-free. Retirees living off bonds and equities require a larger nest egg to match the after-tax income. Again, dividend investors welcome market corrections. I just padded a little more of BNS and IGM @ > 4% yield. I couldn’t have done that had TSX shot through the roof. The correction also enabled me to diversify into real estate: Calloway at 7.6% yield and H&R REIT at 7.9% yield.

>>” the ETF investor will be able to retire earlier as he or she won’t require as large a portfolio.”

I think my responses invalidated that. Dividend investors don’t have to unwind equities as early, dividends receive preferential tax treatments, and dividends are a better hedge against inflation than bonds.

I think my comments got lost…sorry for the formatting..

MER - you can’t just calculate the MER starting at a point when it’s convenient for your argument. I agree that buying div stocks through Questrade will produce an MER that is pretty close to (but not exactly) zero. The other thing is that most investors in the accumulation phase will be make periodic trades so again, $100 of trades/year on a $100k portfolio is really good but not zero (yes, I’m being picky).

Diversification - Good point, I forgot about that.

Horizon - enough money is when you can live off the portfolio alone without too much danger of running out of money while you are still alive. I think how long you have to work will be mostly be determined by how much you save and how much your retirement expenses (or needs) are, rather than the type of investor that you are. Another factor is how much of an estate you want to leave.

4% withdrawal on ETF fluctuates with the market That’s not how the 4% rule works although you could do it like that. Next Friday I have a post on the 4% rule.

Market timing - see my post next Friday.

If both the ETF investor and the dividend investor retire using the 4% rule, with the ETF investor selling equities and withdrawing dividends while the div. investor withdraws dividends only, the ETF investor will be able to retire earlier as he or she won’t require as large a portfolio.

Telly I would argue that as far as the 4% rule is concerned, there is no difference as to what type of investments are held in the portfolio. We tend to assume that a dividend investor will live off of whatever dividends are produced from the portfolio. The fact is that the retired dividend investor can still reinvest part of the dividend income if they choose.

FJG,

Most “diversified” Canadian dividend investor’s portfolios will not yield 4% without loading up on some income trusts which are not favourably taxed or becoming less diversified by owning only high yielding dividend companies.

I agree that income producing investments are extremely important in retirement but for us, income will come from both dividends earned outside our registered portfolio and interest income as well as cap gains from our registered account. It sounds like you are saying the same. I was under the impression you were preaching the “Derek Foster Way” (i.e. no RRSP investments).

In the meantime though, I’m happy to see some growth in VWO for example while I’m waiting for retirement in about 15-20 years. I don’t need the income now.

If you’re maxing out your RRSPs and still have a majority of your investments in non-registered accounts then you’re probably doing better than 99% of the rest of the population, dividends or ETFs!

Telly -

It’s quite easy to assemble a diversified Canadian dividend portfolio that exceed 4% yield. This is especially true now given the recent slide. I think it’ll be a fun little project to create a sample dividend portfolio and share it here this weekend. Would you guys be interested?

FJ - assemble away!

On a side note I picked up some more BNS today at $46.

My new stock buying strategy is to only buy a bit at a time (ie $2k) that way I can buy more at cheaper prices later on. It’s working but I don’t want it to work TOO well…(ie prices keep dropping).

Mike

Yes. I will be very interested in a sample portfolio. Please do it, thanks.

I still have concerns about divident cutting off. Even your portfolio today yields more than 4%, there is no guarantee it will continue to be. Take a look at CITI, the dividend is reduced by 41%.

In the grand scheme of things, a 41% dividend hair cut in one stock is a drop in the bucket as long as the portfolio is properly diversified.

Bad apples do exist from time to time, and I’m sure we can recall many more in the TSX60 during Nortel’s glory days.

[…] recently left a comment on my Top 5 Reasons Why Dividend Investing Over ETF post expressing her skepticism that anyone can build a diversified portfolio yielding over 4% […]

FourPillars wrote >> “I think how long you have to work will be mostly be determined by how much you save and how much your retirement expenses (or needs) are, rather than the type of investor that you are.”

How long you work is also a function of how volatile the 4% withdrawal is. Since the downside volatility of an ETF towers over the income stream of a diversified dividend portfolio, ETF investors will require a bigger cushion to absorb recurring market corrections.

Telly wrote >> “If both the ETF investor and the dividend investor retire using the 4% rule, with the ETF investor selling equities and withdrawing dividends while the div. investor withdraws dividends only, the ETF investor will be able to retire earlier as he or she won’t require as large a portfolio.”

Not if the dividend portfolio is yielding 4%.

[…] post by Financial Jungle Guy Related Posts: A Diversified 4.69% Yielding […]

I’ve never thought of investing in etfs as going against a strategy of investing through dividends. With etfs like Vanguard’s income achievers, have I done something wrong?