Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 558

The power of dividends

A business is worth the cash an owner can get from it, and there are two ways to get that cash: through the mail or through a sale. Collect a dividend payment, or sell the ownership or assets of the company.

Over the life cycle of a business, investors who might someday sell its stock must guess what others might pay for it. An early investor might dream of the company’s addressable market, but they must look to the second investor, who may speculate about its sales. The second investor must think of the third, who may predict its path to profits. And that investor must consider the next one, who may estimate earnings or forecast free cash flow.

We love looking at free cash flow. Yet cash does little good if it is stashed or squandered, and if you don’t control the business, you can’t sell it outright, you can’t sell its assets, and you can’t set its payout policy.

But if you owned the whole thing, you could always demand dividends.

It is the perspective of this owner—no matter how hypothetical or far in the future they may be—that determines the intrinsic value of the business. No matter how many times the shares of a company change hands, its eventual potential to pay dividends is what ultimately determines its worth.

Dividends provide insights into a company

Dividends tell you something about a business. If it pays out, it is probably profitable, but looking at earnings or cash flow could tell you that. Dividends also tell you that its lenders haven’t pressed to prevent cash from leaving the building, and that its leaders care enough about minority shareholders to reward them.

So as minority shareholders, while we love looking at free cash flow, we like looking at dividends too. Historically, that’s often been a rewarding approach. In the US, Europe, and Japan, shares with high dividend yields have outperformed their wider stock markets over the very long term.

Like any lone metric, a company’s dividend is understood best if you deeply understand the business. An exceptionally high yield (dividend per share divided by share price) may presage a dividend cut—this is partly why stocks with pretty high yields have (on average) outperformed those with the very highest yields. High payouts might also tell you that a company can’t find enough attractive projects to invest in, limiting its growth.

Alternatives to dividends

Growth is a competing use for cash, and if a company can reinvest in projects with attractive returns on capital, they usually should. Companies can also repurchase their own shares—buybacks have long eclipsed dividends as the preferred way to return cash to shareholders in the US, helped by tax efficiencies.

Some buybacks are better than others, however. When a company buys their own shares at a deep discount to intrinsic value, as XPO Logistics memorably did following a shoddy short-seller attack in 2018, buybacks can create enormous value. For companies like the many in Japan trading for less than 1x book value, exchanging one dollar of cash for more than one dollar of book value mechanically boosts book value per share and almost-as-assuredly lifts returns on equity. For any company, buybacks may make sense if the return on capital already employed looks better than the return on new projects. But companies can also overpay for their own shares, and buybacks provide a tempting way for executives to hit per-share bonus targets or distract from share-based compensation to their colleagues.

Dividends are simpler, and they have much to recommend them. They tend to grow more quickly than inflation, which helps to protect real returns. Many companies treat dividends as sacrosanct, so dividends can persist through profit wobbles, and high yields are hard for investors to ignore. A stock trading at 10x earnings may drop to 5x with little fanfare, but if a stock yielding 5% halves in price, its 10% yield will attract lots of curious eyes.

Put those traits together, and shares with high yields can reduce both return and forecast risk. On the return side, high-yielding companies in the US, Japan, and Europe have historically suffered shallower drawdowns and less volatility than wider stock markets. On the forecasting side, dividends are often the most predictable part of a company’s expected return. That is important, as growth forecasts for many years into the future can be off by an inch or a mile.

Dividend payers in our portfolio

Recently, we’ve found many compelling ideas with high dividend yields, and every portfolio of ours currently has a higher yield than its benchmark. Not that every holding pays a dividend—many don’t, and for most of those we support the company’s decision to reinvest instead. Some companies pay out a little but can and should pay more.

Yet over a dozen of our holdings offer dividend yields above 5%, with payouts we believe are sustainable. Some pay out cash through both dividends and buybacks, pushing their “all-in” yields to 10% or higher. These are generally mature companies that have managed to grow by at least 5% per annum over many years. Which begs a question: If you can underwrite 15% expected returns with pedestrian assumptions, why bet on predictions for 15 years in the future?

 

Eric Marais is an Investment Specialist at Orbis Investments, a sponsor of Firstlinks. This report contains general information only and not personal financial or investment advice. It does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation or individual needs of any particular person.

For more articles and papers from Orbis, please click here.

 

11 Comments
Steve
May 10, 2024

WhyAsk, so it sounds like you are advocating the trust model of taxation for dividends. What happens if companies decide to reinvest earnings rather than pay dividends. If the trust model was adopted, companies would be forced to pay top marginal rate of tax on undistributed profits. Such an outcome will only serve to push companies into more tax friendly jurisdictions not to mention the strong resistance from the shareholder lobby groups. Interestingly, during the last period of major tax reform in 1999, the Howard Government played around with the idea of taxing trusts like companies as opposed to taxing companies like trusts.

Max Z
May 03, 2024

Enjoyed reading your article Eric as it all makes sense and is a cautious way of Investing without compromising Returns.

I'm all for investing in Dividend Growth Stocks. One thing your article overlooked was the Benefits of Franking Credits attached to Australian Shares that pay Dividends. I see Franking Credits as the "low hanging fruit "that enhances overall Returns. Why leave Franking Credits locked up in a Company which have no value to them?
It dosen't make sense to do that, so best to distribute them to Shareholders who can benefit from them.

WhyAsk
May 05, 2024

I believe franking credit is the non-sense of the Australia and it is the important to remove it completely. Obviously, it will not change your personal dividend as institution like banks will then issue higher dividend before paying tax which means it will gather more international participation as currently overseas citizen don't get franking benefit because it is Australia only thing and once removed there will be more participation from international market which immediately gives growth to many stocks like banks in particular in my opinion. Obviously it will stabilise over time but allowing more player in the market is always good.

Franking system is just a hype created by thinking you don't pay tax on it but in reality you do pay tax on every penny if your personal tax rate is above 30%.

Alex
May 05, 2024

WhyAsk, your comments make very little sense from both technical and language perspectives. What do you mean by "institution like banks will then issue higher dividend BEFORE paying tax......" - you do realise that dividends are paid from AFTER tax profits, don't you?

Also, you might want to research further before commenting on tax treatments - overseas investors don't get to claim franking credits offset, but they are exempt from WHT that otherwise would apply if the dividends are unfranked. Also, if you bother researching the % ownership of many major ASX companies, you'd see straight away there are plenty of foreign investors holding a sizeable ownership in Australian companies.

Franking system is not just a hype - it is intended to eliminate double taxation on the same amount of profits, instead of merely "making you thinking that you don't pay tax on it". Also, technically you have to pay tax on every penny you earn regardless whichever tax bracket you fall into, so your statement that "you do pay tax on every penny if your personal tax rate is ABOVE 30%" is inaccurate.

Dudley
May 05, 2024

"franking credit" ... "remove it completely":

There are many dividend recipients whose marginal, or average, tax rate is less than 30% who benefit by company tax being imputed to them.

. = 0% for superannuation disbursement ('pension') account earnings.
. = 0% for superannuation disbursement recipients.
. 10% and 15% for superannuation accumulation account earnings.
. <=16% for individuals with taxable income less than $45,000 / y.

Just as there are many wage recipients whose marginal, or average, tax rate is less than 30% who benefit by wage tax being imputed to them.

Both groups would be worse off if taxed 30% and the tax was not credited to them.
They would pay tax twice on the same income.

"banks will then issue higher dividend before paying tax":

Only if company tax was 'removed completely'.

Then non-resident shareholders would pay no tax on dividends, but residents would.

Then better to be a non-resident.

WhyAsk
May 06, 2024

Alex

My previous comment might have been unclear. Here's a simpler explanation:

Current System: Companies pay tax on profits, then distribute dividends. Shareholders receive franking credits to offset some of the tax already paid.

Proposed Change: Companies pay dividends directly, then shareholders pay tax on that income.

Benefits of Change:

Removes potential for double taxation (if implemented correctly).
Simplifies the system.

Concerns Addressed:

Withholding Tax (WHT): WHT on foreign investors could be implemented, similar to the US model. This shouldn't deter local investors if it attracts more international investment.


Impact on LICs:

LICs may struggle to maintain their "fully franked" advantage, but low-fee ETFs could provide a more competitive alternative.

Overall:

Revising the franking credit system could be positive, but careful planning and additional reforms are necessary to ensure a smooth transition.

Dudley
May 06, 2024

"Proposed Change: Companies pay dividends directly, then shareholders pay tax on that income.":

Can be difficult to get shareholders or wage earners to pay tax owed (especially non-residents). They might have spent it and made no provision, or just won't.

Therefore, withholding tax is levied at the source of the income: company (company tax) or employer (employee income tax).

Then ATO has less trouble collecting tax.

WhyAsk
May 07, 2024

Dudley

I am not sure if you do invest in US market or not but in US they withhold 15% of dividend income at source so basically broker will pay you 85% of the income earned. Similarly, broker will collect 15% and pay it to ATO and only pass on 85% of income to the shareholder. This is only for those who are not Australian resident for tax purpose.

This system working for decades in US so no reason to think it won't work in Australia.

Dudley
May 07, 2024

"withhold 15% of dividend income at source":

USA / Aus tax treaty.

Withholding company tax already done in Aus.
Aus company tax withholding rate = 25%, 30%.

A reason for it not being 100% is that 100% would reduce cashflow and economic activity.
With imputation of company tax to resident shareholders, the withholding rate is irrelevant to the net tax paid - just relevant to when.

30% withholding rate is a close-ish approximation to most taxpayer's marginal rate:
https://freeimage.host/i/marginal-tax-rate-67-plus.J1zLbJj

For wage earners, more care is taken to try to neither under nor over tax each wage payment because their wages are more likely to be the most significant part of their income, which is more likely to be highly predictable. 100% wage withholding tax would quickly see hunger riots, whereas shareholders have can realise cash through share sales.

Dudley
May 07, 2024

'Unlike franking credits and TFN credits, foreign tax credits/foreign income tax offsets are not refundable.':

https://support.class.com.au/hc/en-au/articles/360001519715-Why-is-my-foreign-dividend-withholding-rate-30-when-standard-withholding-rate-is-only-15

10% or 15% USA withholding tax is not refunded to Aus taxpayers with a lesser tax rate; eg super disbursement accounts.

Ray N
May 03, 2024

Thanks gor the article. Would have been good to have some stock examples in the portfolio though can understand the sensivities around that

 

Leave a Comment:


RELATED ARTICLES

The best strategy to build income for life

Why the ASX 200 has gone nowhere in 16 years

The familiar story on dividends, plus predictions for 2023

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The nuts and bolts of family trusts

There are well over 800,000 family trusts in Australia, controlling more than $3 trillion of assets. Here's a guide on whether a family trust may have a place in your individual investment strategy.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 581 with weekend update

A recent industry event made me realise that a 30 year old investing trend could still have serious legs. Could it eventually pose a threat to two of Australia's biggest companies?

  • 10 October 2024

Preserving wealth through generations is hard

How have so many wealthy families through history managed to squander their fortunes? This looks at the lessons from these families and offers several solutions to making and keeping money over the long-term.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 583

Investing guru Howard Marks says he had two epiphanies while visiting Australia recently: the two major asset classes aren’t what you think they are, and one key decision matters above all else when building portfolios.

  • 24 October 2024

A big win for bank customers against scammers

A recent ruling from The Australian Financial Complaints Authority may herald a new era for financial scams. For the first time, a bank is being forced to reimburse a customer for the amount they were scammed.

The quirks of retirement planning with an age gap

A big age gap can make it harder to find a solution that works for both partners – financially and otherwise. Having a frank conversation about the future, and having it as early as possible, is essential.

Latest Updates

Planning

What will be your legacy?

As we get older, many of us start to think about how we’ll be remembered by those left behind. This looks at why that may not be the best strategy to ensure that you live life well and leave loved ones in good stead.

Economy

It's the cost of government, stupid

Australia's bloated government sector is every bit as responsible for our economic worries as the cost of living crisis. Grand schemes like the 'Future Made in Australia' only look set to make it worse.

SMSF strategies

A guide to valuing SMSF assets correctly

SMSF trustees are required to value all fund assets, including property, at market value when preparing the fund's financial statements each year. Here are some key tips to ensure that you get it right.

Economics

Australia is lucky the British were the first 'intruders'

British colonisation's Common Law system contributed to economic prosperity, in contrast to Latin America's lower wealth under Civil Law. It influenced capitalism's success in former British colonies, like Australia.

Economics

A significant shift in the jobs market

The expansion of the 'care sector' represents the most profound structural change to Australia's job market since the mining boom. This analyses how it's come about and the impact it will have on the economy.

Shares

Searching for value in tech stocks

Just because a stock is cheap doesn't necessarily make it good value. This uses case studies in the tech sector to help identify when stocks trading on 30x earnings may be inexpensive and when others on 10x may be value traps.

Investing

Are more informed investors prone to making poorer decisions?

Finance Professor Michael Finke recently discussed the double-edged sword of taking an interest in your investments, three predictors of panic selling, and why nurses tend to be better investors than doctors.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.