Buy yourself some Mechel PJSC, AP Dividend 2019 amounted to 15.68% , Dividend 18.21 roubles per share - page 7
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
In a horizon of 10 years and without the need of withdrawal - no argument. I am a long-term investor myself. But if we are talking about a year, two or three, then the risks are obviously much bigger than a bank deposit. Gazprom has only come close to exiting a drawdown since 2008, 11 years. And it can be like that with any blue chip stocks. Dividends are not guaranteed either. Anyway you should not confuse a bull trend with you know what) and my post was only about what you say about post factum (!) 25% yield, that it will be the same next year, the probability is unknown, but not 100% for sure.
But tell me more about the risks - how do you see them?
if a deposit in a bank is 5-6%.
he enters, for instance, a group of shares with a 10% dividend - even if something fails - it may not represent the entire deposit.
how can a bank be more interesting in this case?
If you take Sberbank, for instance, deposits of 5-6% and 8% if you buy shares, you better buy shares?
Or do you mean the risk of falling, like in the case of gasprom for 10 years?
But the dividend will make up for the "hurt" and will most likely be if not higher then at least about the same as a bank deposit
You cannot withdraw, but then again, you cannot use the entire deposit for a stock. The averaging has not been abolished - the price went down too much - I bought more - I averaged - I got out after the breakdown of the average price.
But tell me more about the risks - how do you see them?
if a deposit in a bank is 5-6%.
he enters, for instance, a group of shares with a 10% dividend - even if something fails - it may not represent the entire deposit.
how can a bank be more interesting in this case?
If I take Sberbank, for instance, deposits of 5-6% and 8% if I buy shares, should I buy shares?
Or do you mean the risk of falling, like in the case of gasprom for 10 years?
But the dividends will reduce the "offence" and most likely will be if not higher then at least about the same as a bank deposit.
You cannot withdraw, but then again, you cannot use the entire deposit for a stock. The averaging has not been abolished - the price went down too much - I bought more - I averaged - I got out after the breakdown of the average price.
I never said that the deposit in the bank is more interesting :) that's a first.
And about the risks - I'm just a fan of game theory and its applications in risk management, and about the risks it all depends on the model that you build yourself, while the model may be different and not always linear. Let me explain in simple terms - loss of 10% of a deposit = loss X for me. Loss of 10% more (roughly 20% of total) may be equal to loss not X, but to X, where k is an arbitrary coefficient (usually greater than one) and may be a function of something else.
But if we discard complex models and operate only with % of the deposit, just ask yourself the question: are dividends guaranteed and their size? Imagine something happens and the whole market crashes, why would the dividend stay at the same level?
Then it may turn out that you are in a slump of 20-30... %, the dividends have fallen to the floor, the stock may still be cheapening slowly, and then what to do? Wait for a return or save what you have?
That is the risk, that when the market is bull - everything is simple, but when it comes "suddenly" it is not so obvious and decisions are not simple.
If you do not invest the whole deposit, then the profitability percentage for the whole deposit is not the same, i.e. the sum of the profitability percentage for the whole deposit is not considered.
I never said that a deposit in a bank is more interesting :) that's a first.
As for risks - I am a fan of game theory and its applications in risk management. Everything depends on the model that you build yourself, while models may be different and not always linear. Let me explain in simple terms - loss of 10% of a deposit = loss X for me. Loss of 10% more (roughly 20% of total) may be equal to loss not X, but to X, where k is an arbitrary coefficient (usually greater than one) and may be a function of something else.
But if we discard complicated models and operate only with % of the deposit, just ask yourself a question - are dividends guaranteed and their size? Imagine something happened and the whole market crashed, why then would dividends stay at the same level?
Then it may turn out that you are in a slump of 20-30... %, the dividends have fallen to the floor, the stock may still be cheapening slowly, and then what to do? Wait for a return or save what you have?
That is the risk, when the market is bull - everything is simple, but when it comes "suddenly" it is not so obvious and decisions are not simple.
If I do not know the difference between the profitability of the deposit and the one for the deposit, then the difference between the deposit's total return and the return on the investment will not be crucial.
I read somewhere that if a stock has gone too high, i.e. is being actively bought, it is harder to pay the dividends.
If the share is too cheap, the dividend may be raised.
A share that is too cheap can probably pay a good dividend. The bottom line is that it is profitable for the company to attract more investors, which means that the dividend will be raised.
What do you think of this?
p.s.
Here is some more interesting information
https://www.rbc.ru/business/22/01/2020/5e26d3369a79476f44968910?utm_source=application
Cumulative payments by year
MECHEL AP
I read somewhere that if a stock has gone too high, i.e. it is being bought very actively, then it is harder to pay dividends to the company.
If a share is too cheap, the dividend may increase.
A share that is too cheap can probably pay a good dividend. The bottom line is that it is profitable for the company to attract more investors, which means that the dividend will be raised.
What do you think of this?
p.s.
Here is some more interesting information
https://www.rbc.ru/business/22/01/2020/5e26d3369a79476f44968910?utm_source=application
I'm not a specialist in stocks, though I used to visit the library.)
If they write so, there is something in it. But at a glance, I see the following nuances which should be taken into account:
- Why would a company want to maintain its capitalisation in the general case? It is not obvious. If it is self-sufficient and its operating conditions do not depend on all kinds of ratings related to capitalization, perhaps there is no reason. There are examples of loss-making companies with growing shares and steadily profitable companies whose shares have been dangling for years without growth.
- If top managers have KPI tied to capitalization, then yes, they are interested and it is certainly a trend. Then the following BUTs.
- Dividends have to be paid out of something. If fall of stocks is not purely speculative but if market and/or industry is really bad and company has not enough profit and suddenly reserves of previous years are missing? Where to get dividends from?
- Then a conflict of interests arises for the top management - to keep the company for the future, or to retain the share price by any means, even if by critical depletion of reserves, as long as the annual bonus is not lost. The example of Lehman Brothers before the collapse with record bonuses for top management.
- Sometimes the company itself and key shareholders benefit from falling shares, e.g. to buy back and/or increase shares.
I do not think it is easy there with their insides and manipulations, so I do not want to get involved in speculative trading, although it is interesting. For me personally on Forex, it is a little clearer :)
The article in RBC already scares me with the title - I want to get out of their shares as fast as possible))))
I never said that a deposit in a bank is more interesting :) that's a first.
As for risks - I am a fan of game theory and its applications in risk management. Everything depends on the model that you build yourself, while models may be different and not always linear. Let me explain in simple terms - loss of 10% of a deposit = loss X for me. Loss of 10% more (roughly 20% of total) may be equal to loss not X, but to X, where k is an arbitrary coefficient (usually greater than one) and may be a function of something else.
But if we discard complicated models and operate only with % of the deposit, just ask yourself a question - are dividends guaranteed and their size? Imagine something happened and the whole market crashed, why then would dividends stay at the same level?
Then it may turn out that you are in a slump of 20-30... %, the dividends have fallen to the floor, the stock may still be cheapening slowly, and then what to do? Wait for a return or save what you have?
That is the risk, that when the market is bull - everything is simple, but when it comes "suddenly" it is not so obvious and decisions are not simple.
Therefore any strategy with such a high-risk asset as shares (and not only) do not imply investing the whole, but the risky part of the deposit, which means that the recalculation of the % return on the entire deposit is not the same.
If you bought shares without using leverage, your deposit is not lost until you sell the shares (close the position). The value of the stock will simply decrease. To even out the fall in the price of shares of one issuer, so-called portfolio investing (diversification) is applied.
....
If you have a sufficiently large deposit in the bank, you can use the interest earned on the deposit to buy stocks and bonds, and reinvest the dividends and coupons. In this case, you risk only the profit from the deposit in the bank, while the deposit itself remains unchanged. But you have to have a big enough bank deposit to be able to buy shares at least once in three months on the interest. If to estimate at random then for the deposit to have an income equal to an average salary in the country you need a deposit of 15-20 million rubles at 5-6% per annum. And the bank should be sufficiently reliable as deposits in our country are insured only at 1.4 million, all that is higher is not insured.
If you buy a stock without using leverage, your deposit is not lost until you sell the stock (close the position). The value of the stock will simply decrease. In order to even out the fall in the share price of one issuer, so-called portfolio investing (diversification) is applied.
....
If you have a sufficiently large deposit in the bank, you can use the interest earned on the deposit to buy stocks and bonds, and reinvest the dividends and coupons. In this case, you risk only the profit from the deposit in the bank, while the deposit itself remains unchanged. But you have to have a big enough bank deposit to be able to buy shares at least once in three months on the interest. If to estimate at random then for the deposit to have an income equal to an average salary in the country you need a deposit of 15-20 million rubles at 5-6% per annum. And the bank should be sufficiently reliable as deposits are insured only at 1.4 million, all that is higher is not insured.
If you count in dynamics, i.e. time slice, for example annual, then if your shares fall by 10%, you have current loss of 10%, and it does not matter whether you close your position and later invest in another asset, or do not close and continue investing in the same asset, just at the end of the year you have 10% less funds available. Maybe your great-grandchildren will close the position)
Other than that I agree.
But tell me more about the risks - how do you see them?
if a deposit in a bank is 5-6%.
he enters, for instance, a group of shares with a 10% dividend - even if something fails - it may not represent the entire deposit.
how can a bank be more interesting in this case?
If you buy shares, you should buy them at least at Sberbank, deposits 5-6% and 8%.
Or do you mean the risk of falling, like in the case of gasprom for 10 years?
But the dividends will reduce the "hurt" and will most likely be if not higher then at least about the same as a bank deposit?
You cannot withdraw, but then again, you cannot use the entire deposit for a stock. The averaging has not been abolished - the price went down too much - I bought more - I averaged - I got out after the breakdown of the average price.
Failure))))
If you do not take the whole deposit, the yield will be 2 times less, not 8%, but 4%.
If you endlessly average over 10 years, no deposit will be enough. You suggest to spend your entire salary on averaging, not to go on holiday to sanatoriums to compensate for health, in the hope that suddenly the company will be generous and pay a good dividend.
Do not invest so badly, sell for the time being and buy more reliable assets)))).
p.s. to reduce dividends you have to reduce profits, to reduce profits you have to increase expenses. https://www.vedomosti.ru/business/news/2019/08/29/809922-zarplati-rabochih-gazpromaIf you have a sufficiently large deposit in the bank, then you can use the interest earned on the deposit to buy stocks and bonds, and reinvest the dividends and coupons. In this case, in shares you risk only the profit from the deposit, and the deposit itself remains unchanged.
Alas, only the figures remain unchanged, while the deposit itself will be eaten up by inflation - the estimated level of inflation from the Central Bank is not even worth discussing,
but in fact, any interest rate from the bank always does not cover consumer inflation for a few years - there is also a trick with categories of goods / services - the process of appreciation of goods is not uniform across industries, you need to estimate for 3-5 years the change in prices of goods (services)
Alas, only the figures will remain unchanged, while the deposit itself will be eaten up by inflation - the estimated inflation rate from the Central Bank is not even worth discussing, as everything is balanced there as usual,
But in fact any interest rate from the bank always does not cover consumer inflation for a few years - there is also some trick with categories of goods / services - the process of appreciation of goods is not uniform across industries, you need to estimate for 3-5 years the change in prices of goods (services)
We are not talking about inflation here, but about risk. But in general, you are right, the Central Bank rate does not cover real inflation, and thus the purchasing power of money at the bank. depot. is falling. In these conditions it is more profitable to buy shares than to make a bank deposit. Inflation is the price increase. If prices go up, the price of stocks goes up. Prices of various goods and services do rise irregularly, and we are officially given an average inflation rate. There is also hidden inflation. The price of a commodity does not change but the volume decreases. For example, if a packet of granulated sugar cost 1 kg. 30 rubles. Now you can meet a packet of 0.9 kg for the same 30 rubles. I do not speak about deterioration of goods quality.