Going
into 2014, situations like Boeing, PPG and 3M create a tremendous temptation to
chase their performance. All three are
excellent companies, and there are many reasons to believe that the conditions
that led to the superior performance of Boeing's and PPG's stock are still in
place. 3M on the other hand appears to
be fully priced, although the stock has historically been able to maintain a
premium for a number of years.
Stability,
simplicity, profitability, and low risk are not the only objectives of the
portfolio. As the name widows’ and
orphans’ implies, dividends are an important consideration in the design and
objectives of the portfolio. Dividends
interact with stability and low risk, but the more important point is that, for
this portfolio, they are an objective in-and-of-themselves.
Consequently,
dividend flows are a consideration in planning for 2014. Managing dividend flows involves three
considerations. First, one obviously
cares about the total dollars the portfolio generates. Second, the investor is risking capital to
secure those dividends. How much capital
is at risk matters. Consequently, the
yield (rate of return the dividend represents) is also a concern. Third, if one only cared about the total
dollars and the rate of return, there would be a tremendous temptation to chase
yield and to invest only in the highest yielding stock. That would introduce considerable risk in two
ways: the high-yield stock would become an inordinately large portion of the
portfolio and that high-yield stock would probably embody considerable interest
rate risk (risk of the decline in price if interest rates rise). Therefore, the amount or portion of the
dividend flow due to each individual stock is a consideration. It is desirable to have the dividend flow
originate from a variety of different stocks.
By
purchasing additional shares of Boeing and PPG, the dividend yield (percentage
rate of return) of the portfolio decreased.
Both have dividend yields lower than the average of the portfolio. Further, selling GE shares in order to
purchase PPG involved selling higher-yield shares to purchase ones with a lower
yield. Fortunately, dividend increases
across a portfolio supported the dollar value of the dividends, but at a lower
yield. The total dividend flow from the
entire portfolio is obviously a concern.
Nevertheless, a legitimate objective for 2014 is to restore the yield on
the portfolio.
One
of the considerations in making the purchases of Boeing and PPG shares was the
dollar value of their dividends. The
total dollar value of the dividends from each individual component of the
portfolio is managed in order to control risk.
The dividend flow is diversified so that no single firm’s dividend
represents too much of a risk to the cash flow.
In fact, references to bringing holdings of Boeing and PPG up to desired
levels involved a dollar dividend flow objective. Thus, during 2014, one should consider
investing dividends in those stocks that are not at the desired dollar
payout. At the same time, one would want
to also increase the average yield of the portfolio. Hopefully, that can be done within the portfolio. If that is not possible, some additional
companies could be added to the portfolio.
When
one acquires a stock, one hopes that sales, profit, and/or dividends per share
will increase. It is of course best if
all three increase. During 2013, Boeing's
launch of a new airplane indicates that sales and profits should increase going
forward. That should increase potential
for higher dividends. As it turned out,
during 2013 Boeing met all three objectives when it raised its dividend. PPG, by contrast, has done exceedingly well
on maintaining profitability, and whether they increase their dividend
significantly will be an important indicator of whether management retains
their traditional shareholder-friendly posture.
By contrast, 3M increased their dividend, but it needs to confirm that
they can generate profits to support future dividend increases.
A
multiyear run up in value of stock, such as occurred with PPG, or one year near
doubling, as occurred with Boeing, can disrupt the desired portfolio weightings
of different stocks. In fact, it was the
performance of PPG and Boeing that justified the continued dividend
reinvestment in Exxon and 3M during 2013.
In order to maintain a reasonable exposure to energy, it makes sense to
plan to continue the dividend reinvestment in Exxon into 2014. Adding exposure to Chevron is an equally
viable approach. Although 3M appears to
be fully or overvalued, planning to continue dividend reinvestment for 3M also
makes sense from the portfolio perspective.
Further, if it pulls back it will be a candidate for investment of
dividends generated by other stocks.
As
was mentioned, GE shares were sold in order to take advantage of the
opportunity in PPG. It may be appropriate
to begin dividend reinvestment in GE during 2014. If one held United Technology, an alternative
to GE mentioned in connection with the widows’ and orphans’ portfolio, the
situation is different. GE is, in many
respects, a unique industrial firm because of the substantial holdings in the
financial sector. Its management also
creates some unique issues that will be discussed in a future posting.
Similarly,
the Bank of New York Mellon is a candidate for dividend reinvestment. Both the Bank of New York Mellon and GE fell
substantially during the financial crisis.
As a consequence, they are below an appropriate portfolio weighting
unless one purchased them at some point in the interim. But there were no compelling reasons to
purchase them previously. However, the
Bank of New York Mellon is particularly well situated going into 2014. It is a potential candidate for reinvestment
of dividends from other stocks. However,
it has one of the lower yields of the portfolio holdings. Therefore, one would have to be very
confident that it will be able to increase its dividend in order to justify
anything more than just automatic dividend reinvestment.
The
other portfolio adjustment to consider is in the area of consumer non-durables. Consumer non-durables play an important role
in stabilizing the portfolio during market downturns. However, the bull market since the financial
crisis will have shifted the portfolio weighting of consumer non-durables to a
lower level. That was particularly true
in 2013. Consequently, Pepsi and Procter
& Gamble (or Kimberly-Clark, Clorox or Colgate Palmolive mentioned as
alternatives to Procter & Gamble) are candidates for dividend reinvestment
or additional purchases.
It
is important to keep in mind that the plan for 2014 is not about trying to pick
the stock that will appreciate the most.
If that were the case, further investment in PPG would definitely be a
candidate for consideration. There are
multiple rules for establishing limits on the weighting of an individual stock
in a portfolio. Some people use 5%, 10%,
or 20% of the portfolio’s value. An
equally valid approach is to set a limit to the portion of total dividend flow
that any individual stock should contribute.
There is a more subtle rationale for establishing a total dollar value
to any individual holding (e.g., that limit could be determined by the
relationship of the stock’s value to one's income needs over some period of
time). But given PPG’S multiyear run it should have achieved close to the maximum
weight one desires for an individual stock regardless of what technique is used
for setting that maximum portfolio weighting.
If
the plan were simply about picking the stock that has the potential to
appreciate the most, the entire focus might be on a single stock. A good guess is that Bank of New York Mellon
or PPG would be that stock. But such a
focus is totally at odds with the objectives of the widows’ and orphans’
portfolio. The objective is performance
over a long-term horizon, not just over the next year.
Even
with a multiyear time horizon for investments, 2013 illustrated that one can
benefit substantially from simply monitoring what is going on a portfolio and
adjusting purchases accordingly. So,
although there is a plan for 2014, that plan explicitly provides for using
developments during the year to maximize the benefits of dividend reinvestments
and new purchases.
No comments:
Post a Comment