I’m not retarded. But your mothers son clearly is. Anyway, the premise of the thread (which clearly evades you) is to show that buy and hold of many “Blue Chip” dividend darlings has been a losing strategy over the last 20 years.
Sorry bro you can't change your premise and then claim a new one was always what you meant. You said dividend stocks are bad investment strategies. I wouldn't have bought any of those, by the way.
My quotes are almost identical. I don’t understand what you mean? One sentence adds “blue chip”, otherwise the same exact thing. And if you looked at the 16 specific examples I wrote you would know they are (or were) the top tier of blue chips over the last 20 years. (Unless you are a Nooby that is) Not flaming, but seriously have you just started trading in the last handful of years? Nothing wrong, we all started from scratch. Just seems like you’re intent on trying to prove something was wrong with my thesis even though another poster has run the data which proved my point. Finally, you say you wouldn’t have bought any of the stocks I mentioned, which pretty much guarantees you have only been in the business since FAANG became the “it” thing. Anyway. Good luck brother. No reason to keep this thread alive if it’s just you and I going back and forth.
Clubby isn't the old man, I am. I'll give ya a heads up. Clubby is right, dividend policies for an investor system is brain dead, I've never understood it and never will. But, most investors are stupid, that goes with the territory. Let me illustrate, most dividends paid out annually or bi annually would be less than 5% return pa, well that's the case in Australia where I trade and prolly so elsewhere too. A stock price can move that amount with no difficulty over 2-3 days. Why would one invest for 12 months to get what one could get in a week or less? Now if a stock price tanks during the year, you have lost usually more than 5% because most investors are buy & hold. The only reason I can see to buy dividend paying stocks is because compared to those that aren't, divvy stocks are more stable, easier to trade, most often bounce on support as fund managers are supporting them. Divvy stocks are often stable predictable type trading stocks. Therefore a trader is better trading these vehicles but not buy & hold blindly for the sake of a pissy little dividend.
There is another negative thing, divvy stocks often drop right on ex dividend date the same % amount as the dividend being paid.
I'd like to play a game. Will @Clubber Lang choose to believe some random poster's random backtest (with questionable dividend reinvestment decisions) or will he choose well-researched results: Winner gets to take Clubber's mom for a date.
The market has always rewarded stocks hat provide growth. I still remember the day that i went into a blockbuster and stated to myself that when netflix was at 8 dollars that it wouldn't go nowhere. Now that was a mistake and I will try not to be so shortsighted again. That is why i trade two perspectives short term swing trades and long term trades like my Facebook trade that i held for 5 years where i bought it at 25 and later sold it at 180.