Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 345

Where do sustainable returns come from?

Share prices across the Australian market have risen by an average of 20% over the past 12 months. This looks like great news on the surface but we need to look deeper to see where those gains came from and whether they are sustainable.

People have a tendency to mentally ‘lock in’ past gains and assume they are ‘in the bank’. The problem is that almost all of the 20% share price gains over the past 12 months were probably only temporary and should not be assumed to be ‘locked in’ at all. The 20% share price gains were not underpinned by 20% higher company profits nor 20% higher dividends. Profits per share across the market actually fell over the period, and dividends per share rose by only 4% (and most of the dividend increases were due to temporary commodity price spikes from the miners).

Paying more for the same profits

Twelve months ago, investors were prepared to pay $16.25 per dollar of company profits, but over the past year, they bid the price up to $20.40 per dollar of profits. They are now paying 25% more per dollar of profit than they did a year ago.

Twelve months ago, investors were prepared to pay $23 per dollar of company dividends (i.e. dividend yield of 4.34%) but over the past year they bid the price up to $26.40 per dollar of dividends (dividend yield of 3.8%). They are now paying 14% more per dollar of dividends than a year ago.

What caused this miraculous 25% increase in the price paid for a dollar of profits and 14% increase in the price of a dollar of dividends?

The main reason is confidence levels. At the start of 2019 people were pessimistic and feared the late 2018 ‘global growth scare’ might turn into the next GFC or possibly worse, especially as the US Fed was still raising interest rates amid Trump’s trade wars. Investor pessimism quickly turned to confidence when the Fed switched from rate hikes in 2018 to rate cuts in 2019. Central banks raise rates when they are bullish on the economy and cut rates when they are bearish. The crowd (investors) do the reverse.

The charts break this down by market sector. The left chart shows price gains over the past 12 months; the middle chart splits this into changes in earnings (profits) per share and changes in the price paid per dollar of profits; and the right chart does the same for dividends:

Looking at the two big sectors:

First: Financials. Profits per share fell (across the Big 4 banks plus other disasters like AMP) but share prices rose 13%, so investors en masse boosted the price per dollar of profit by 25%, and the price per dollar of dividend by 17% (dividends also fell). The crowd assumes the current banking woes are temporary and banks will miraculously return to the golden years of double-digit profit growth. Our view has been that those golden years are gone. The banks are facing not only cyclical pressures (margin pressure from ultra-low rates, and bad debts from property developers/investors) but also more lasting structural pressures (crippling regulations, expensive remediation and compliance, higher capital costs, deteriorating demographics).

Second: Resources. Profits and dividends rose by 30%+ per share, a combination of recoveries from big write-offs from prior years, plus the fortuitous spikes in iron ore and oil prices. Investors have sensibly discounted this and only bid up share prices by 12% because they know this profit and dividend growth is not repeatable. Many of the miners are probably underpriced at current levels.

The market is now in expensive territory, with price/earnings ratios above 20 (more than $20 being paid per dollar of profits) and dividend yields below 3.8% ($26.40 per dollar of dividends). In order to hold on to the recent price gains, either profits and dividends need to rise substantially in 2020, or central banks need to keep cutting rates and buying up assets. That is, central banks need to remain bearish and pessimistic so that the crowd remains overconfident. 

 

Ashley Owen is Chief Investment Officer at advisory firm Stanford Brown and The Lunar Group. He is also a Director of Third Link Investment Managers, a fund that supports Australian charities. This article is for general information purposes only and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

 

6 Comments
Mark
February 19, 2020

Good afternoon,

Thanks for this good article. Could you please provide some explanation of how dividend yields below 3.8% equate to $26.40 per dollar of dividends.

a owen
February 20, 2020

hi mark - if I pay $100 for a share that pays $3.80 dividend I am paying 100/3.8 = $26.40 dollars per dollar of dividend (I rounded the 3.8% div yield for the story). It is the reverse of the price/earnings ratio because the numerator and denominator are switched. If I pay $26.40 for a dollar of dividends I am hoping of course that dividends rise over time - but that is always the case whether I pay $20 or $30 or even $10.
cheers

ashley

Warren Bird
February 20, 2020

Ashley, your calculation is not the reverse of a P/E. It's still got P on the top, but you have D instead of E on the bottom.

And you don't actually need dividends to grow to justify paying $100 for $3.80 a year of income. It just means that you're discounting $3.80 a year at 3.8%.
But I understand that what you're saying is you'd rather have dividends grow so that your total return is better than 3.8% a year.

Mark
February 20, 2020

Thanks Ashley, appreciate your help.

Cheers

Mark

stefy
February 19, 2020

I believe the current share market prices and global warming are intimately related. Let me explain why. The current market prices are based wholly and solely on fiat money creation by the Fed in USA ($500 billion late last year alone). The exponential rise in fiat money has facilitated the rise of an economic backwater in China to a superpower producing every consumer good possible. It has made the world full of possibilities, exploit commodities worldwide, create new mines and industries, increase production etc etc, and allow wild asset inflation like housing and stocks. Fiat money, a world without limits, has created global climate change as sure as I am alive and breathing. So much for modern money theory.

Tony Reardon
February 19, 2020

We review our asset allocations every half year. The 2019 performance of local and international equities of 20%+ naturally led to a slightly out of balance portfolio and so we we moved a percentage out of equities into fixed interest. While this might feel like one is “selling winners”, it does lock in some of those profits.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Australian large caps outperform small caps over long term

Buy the dips?

The ASX is full of old, stodgy, low-growth companies

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Pros and cons of Labor's home batteries scheme

Labor has announced a $2.3 billion Cheaper Home Batteries Program, aimed at slashing the cost of home batteries. The goal is to turbocharge battery uptake, though practical difficulties may prevent that happening.

Howard Marks: the investing game has changed

The famed investor says the rapid switch from globalisation to trade wars is the biggest upheaval in the investing environment since World War Two. And a new world requires a different investment approach.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 606 with weekend update

The boss of Australia’s fourth largest super fund by assets, UniSuper’s John Pearce, says Trump has declared an economic war and he’ll be reducing his US stock exposure over time. Should you follow suit?

  • 10 April 2025

4 ways to take advantage of the market turmoil

Every crisis throws up opportunities. Here are ideas to capitalise on this one, including ‘overbalancing’ your portfolio in stocks, buying heavily discounted LICs, and cherry picking bombed out sectors like oil and gas.

An enlightened dividend path

While many chase high yields, true investment power lies in companies that steadily grow dividends. This strategy, rooted in patience and discipline, quietly compounds wealth and anchors investors through market turbulence.

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.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

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.

Investment strategies

Does dividend investing make sense?

Dividend investing offers steady income and behavioral benefits, but its effectiveness depends on goals, market conditions, and fundamentals - especially in retirement, where it may limit full use of savings.

Economics

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.

Strategy

Ageing in spurts

Fascinating initial studies suggest that while we age continuously in years, our bodies age, not at a uniform rate, but in spurts at around ages 44 and 60.

Interviews

Platinum's new international funds boss shifts gears

Portfolio Manager Ted Alexander outlines the changes that he's made to Platinum's International Fund portfolio since taking charge in March, while staying true to its contrarian, value-focused roots.

Investment strategies

Four ways to capitalise on a forgotten investing megatrend

The Trump administration has not killed the multi-decade investment opportunity in decarbonisation. These four industries in particular face a step-change in demand and could reward long-term investors.

Strategy

How the election polls got it so wrong

The recent federal election outcome has puzzled many, with Labor's significant win despite a modest primary vote share. Preference flows played a crucial role, highlighting the complexity of forecasting electoral results.

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.