Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 312

How share buybacks boost the US market

It is a stately process, and one that approaches the level of a ritual. In Australia, large companies announce their intentions to buy back shares using some of their excess cash. They mail out explanatory notices to their shareholders and invite them to participate in the buyback.

Everyone gets something: the company buys back shares, typically at a discount to their market price; remaining shareholders get higher earnings per share, and exiting shareholders, through the alchemy of tax, can sometimes get a financial benefit too. It is an almost perfect example of cooperative capitalism.

The only drawback is that it occurs in a small market at the bottom of the world. This is a description of the buyback regime in Australia, where for years companies have balanced the interests of investors seeking dividend income with those seeking earnings growth. Corporate share buybacks overall have consistently been 1-2% annually of overall market capitalisation in Australia over the past 20 years.

In the US, a different process unfolds

In the US, with low taxes on dividends but no dividend imputation, off-market buybacks are relatively unknown. But on-market buybacks have surged in the past 20 years, up to 3% annually of US market capitalisation. An even greater share of profits on average have been used to buy back shares than to pay shareholder dividends. Instead of everyone getting something, some get a lot. Current shareholders receive a boost to earnings growth from a lower share count. Company executives (whose compensation is frequently based on earnings growth accompanied by share price targets) often see the value of their compensation rise significantly.

Dividend-focused investors get little, and those looking for increased corporate investment – investment that offers the prospect of boosting employment – can also be disappointed. Instead of the cooperative capitalism that characterises off-market buybacks, this is a capitalism that favours management and shareholders, each of whose focus has appeared increasingly short-term in recent years.

Traditional corporate finance theory split corporate profits into earnings to be retained, and those to be distributed to shareholders as dividends. During the 1980s, however, this model was revised – at least in the US – by deregulation, the hostile takeover movement and a new ideology of maximising shareholder value. By the end of the millennium, US corporate executives became focused on using repurchases, as well as dividends, as an important way of distributing corporate profits to shareholders. Chart 1 shows the increase of buybacks relative to dividends by US companies over time. Buybacks by US companies now constitute the single largest use of corporate profits.

US corporation dividend yield and buyback yield

share buybacks

share buybacks

Source: Straehl and Ibbotson, ‘The Long-Run Drivers of Stock Returns: Total Payouts and the Real Economy’, Financial Analysts Journal 2017.

In theory, corporate stock buybacks are a healthy financial activity

The underlying rationale for buybacks is that a company without significant profitable investments to be made is better returning profits to shareholders, either through buybacks or dividends. The two modes of distribution, however, are fundamentally different. Payouts through dividends increase the income return of shareholders. Buybacks increase the price return per share, since a holding investor’s share of the company through the buyback is increased on a per share basis.

They do so in two ways: in the short term, by providing a price return through the increased demand created by the buyback, and in the medium term by providing increased earnings per share, since the number of shares is reduced going forward.

The two effects together can be combined into a single expression of buyback yield which is the change in a company’s aggregate shares outstanding. US companies bought back an estimated 2.8% of their shares in 2018; ASX companies bought back about 1%.

Buybacks as a % of market capitalisation for the ASX 300 (rolling 12 months)

share buybacks

Source: Vinva Investment Management

Stock buybacks have unequivocally improved corporate earnings growth – mathematically, they must – but another collateral benefit has been company management compensation. Since large-scale, open-market repurchases give a boost to a company’s stock price, some of the prime beneficiaries of stock-price increases are the same corporate executives who decide the timing and size of the buybacks.

In addition, until the regulation was changed in 2017, performance-based executive compensation – much of it tied to buybacks – also received favourable corporate tax treatment.

The aggregate effects of stock buybacks

The most relevant question with respect to buybacks, however, is not whether they are productive or not. Instead, it is whether a practice that appears to have contributed to large growth in market capitalisation is a stable one at an aggregate level. In particular, the use of debt to fund stock buybacks probably deserves greater scrutiny.

A significant percentage of US stock buybacks over the past ten years have been funded by debt. In 2017, for example, roughly one-third of all US stock buybacks were debt-funded. Global large-cap companies with intangible assets in their brand and franchises, including franchise brand companies such as McDonald’s, YUM! Brands, and Domino’s Pizza Inc., have bought back so much stock and issued so much debt to do so, that they have negative balance sheet equity – that is, the book value of their assets is less than their liabilities.

With central banks still providing ample credit and liquidity to financial markets, buybacks look set to continue over the short-term. US corporate share buybacks are so far setting a record pace this year, even higher than their record 2018 levels. For both corporate management and shareholders, earnings growth is cheap – to generate it, all management needs to do is keep buying back shares. It’s hard to see an end to this trend, unless government regulation or tax treatment changes.

Impact of stopping buybacks on US market values

The US stock market, which makes up 63% of the MSCI World Index, continues to be at a 33% premium to the rest of the world (in aggregate, on a trailing price/earnings multiple basis). However, if the stock buyback component of 9% average annual earnings growth over the past five years for US companies were to disappear over the next five years, the cumulative loss of earnings would push the S&P500 price/earnings multiple to 23.5x. This compares to the rest of the world’s trailing price/earnings multiple of 15x. The discrepancy in valuations between markets alone should give an investor allocating between regions cause for concern.

If stock buybacks in the US stop for any reason, both management and investors alike will have to shift earnings per share expectations downwards. Based on comparable recent history, that wouldn’t be pretty.

 

John O’Brien is a Principal Adviser at Whitehelm Capital, an affiliate of Fidante Partners. The views expressed in this article are those of the author. This article is for general information purposes only and does not consider the circumstances of any investor.

 


 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

The impacts of military and geopolitical crises on share markets

Should you bank on the Westpac buy-back?

It's the middle of reporting season: what's really happening?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian house prices close in on world record

Sydney is set to become the world’s most expensive city for housing over the next 12 months, a new report shows. Our other major cities aren’t far behind unless there are major changes to improve housing affordability.

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

Tariffs are a smokescreen to Trump's real endgame

Behind market volatility and tariff threats lies a deeper strategy. Trump’s real goal isn’t trade reform but managing America's massive debts, preserving bond market confidence, and preparing for potential QE.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

Getting rich vs staying rich

Strategies to get rich versus stay rich are markedly different. Here is a look at the five main ways to get rich, including through work, business, investing and luck, as well as those that preserve wealth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

Superannuation

The huge cost of super tax concessions

The current net annual cost of superannuation tax subsidies is around $40 billion, growing to more than $110 billion by 2060. These subsidies have always been bad policy, representing a waste of taxpayers' money.

Planning

How to avoid inheritance fights

Inspired by the papal conclave, this explores how families can avoid post-death drama through honest conversations, better planning, and trial runs - so there are no surprises when it really matters.

Superannuation

Super contribution splitting

Super contribution splitting allows couples to divide before-tax contributions to super between spouses, maximizing savings. It’s not for everyone, but in the right circumstances, it can be a smart strategy worth exploring.

Economy

Trump vs Powell: Who will blink first?

The US economy faces an unprecedented clash in leadership styles, but the President and Fed Chair could both take a lesson from the other. Not least because the fiscal and monetary authorities need to work together.

Gold

Credit cuts, rising risks, and the case for gold

Shares trade at steep valuations despite higher risks of a recession. Amid doubts that a 60/40 portfolio can still provide enough protection through times of market stress, gold's record shines bright.

Investment strategies

Buffett acolyte warns passive investors of mediocre future returns

While Chris Bloomstan doesn't have the track record of his hero, it's impressive nonetheless. And he's recently warned that today has uncanny resemblances to the 1990s tech bubble and US returns are likely to be disappointing.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 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.