It's funny that I keep reading the same crap about dividend strategies in an unqualified generalization. Incidentally, you are in the best of company with "experts" such as Aktienmasseur.
I really don't understand why people who have 1 million stocks in their portfolio have a problem with dividend strategies and want to talk about homo oeconomicus - do you realize how contradictory that is?
Let me look at this from my point of view and I'll try to do something that these acrobats here somehow never do: to align the whole thing with examples, that would mean that they have thought about it themselves - but we just hear parrots.
Now let's assume the total amount is 120k, the payout is monthly for 1 euro/payout and the payout is 919.32/month. The growth is 2% over the next 10 years, (source https://www.finanzfluss.de/rechner/entnahmeplan/)
Let's take the example of Heinz. Based in Germany, saves ONE thesaurus ETF that costs 1 cent per share. As a side assumption, let's say that he is already making full use of his saver's allowance elsewhere. His withdrawal amount would be net 918.32 (one cent per share because I'm lazy).
Absolutely exemplary, the strategy and implementation harmonize perfectly. I really can't complain!
Now the dear forum members: I'm assuming the same financial data as above. However, they have 33 stocks and I am so bold as to go into the extrme and say that they have Berskhire A and Lindt, among others, and each individual stock in the portfolio accounts for exactly 3.33%. Prize question: what does the ideal payout plan look like and which share is now being de-risked and how? Berkshire cannot be de-saved monthly with 919.32 - fractions can only be de-saved in total (with the brokers I know). But the stupid thing now is that the portfolio is now unbalanced and theoretically a rebalance would have to happen. This means that each sale would now cost 34 euros (assuming that each trade costs 1 euro).
You could also start with a cheap share, but the portfolio would still be unbalanced and you cannot actually rebalance Berkshire. Another way would be to not rebalance, but that would unbalance the total return of the portfolio. As you can see, the whole thing is becoming very tedious and that's why, due to my laziness, I've only touched on the problem here and not really backed it up with figures.
It's funny that, of all people, those who have built a portfolio that is unsuitable for saving want to talk about dividend strategies and their usefulness.
Just to make it very clear:
- I am not criticizing a portfolio with 30+ stocks.
- I am criticizing people who do not have a rationally explainable portfolio but want to explain to me that my dividend stocks are supposedly irrational
But what I find most hilarious is when someone like that claims: "People with dividend stocks can't do math". Without ever having calculated an example and without knowing what the respective costs are. In my case, for example, I have absolutely the same costs for dividend and accumulation ETFs (assuming the same ETF as a basis). In other words, it makes ZERO financial difference to me which variant I choose.
PS: yes, I made a few particularly negative assumptions with the 30+ portfolio, a simplification with the 1 ETF portfolio. But I didn't want to go too far with the details, I think it was far enough
I really don't understand why people who have 1 million stocks in their portfolio have a problem with dividend strategies and want to talk about homo oeconomicus - do you realize how contradictory that is?
Let me look at this from my point of view and I'll try to do something that these acrobats here somehow never do: to align the whole thing with examples, that would mean that they have thought about it themselves - but we just hear parrots.
Now let's assume the total amount is 120k, the payout is monthly for 1 euro/payout and the payout is 919.32/month. The growth is 2% over the next 10 years, (source https://www.finanzfluss.de/rechner/entnahmeplan/)
Let's take the example of Heinz. Based in Germany, saves ONE thesaurus ETF that costs 1 cent per share. As a side assumption, let's say that he is already making full use of his saver's allowance elsewhere. His withdrawal amount would be net 918.32 (one cent per share because I'm lazy).
Absolutely exemplary, the strategy and implementation harmonize perfectly. I really can't complain!
Now the dear forum members: I'm assuming the same financial data as above. However, they have 33 stocks and I am so bold as to go into the extrme and say that they have Berskhire A and Lindt, among others, and each individual stock in the portfolio accounts for exactly 3.33%. Prize question: what does the ideal payout plan look like and which share is now being de-risked and how? Berkshire cannot be de-saved monthly with 919.32 - fractions can only be de-saved in total (with the brokers I know). But the stupid thing now is that the portfolio is now unbalanced and theoretically a rebalance would have to happen. This means that each sale would now cost 34 euros (assuming that each trade costs 1 euro).
You could also start with a cheap share, but the portfolio would still be unbalanced and you cannot actually rebalance Berkshire. Another way would be to not rebalance, but that would unbalance the total return of the portfolio. As you can see, the whole thing is becoming very tedious and that's why, due to my laziness, I've only touched on the problem here and not really backed it up with figures.
It's funny that, of all people, those who have built a portfolio that is unsuitable for saving want to talk about dividend strategies and their usefulness.
Just to make it very clear:
- I am not criticizing a portfolio with 30+ stocks.
- I am criticizing people who do not have a rationally explainable portfolio but want to explain to me that my dividend stocks are supposedly irrational
But what I find most hilarious is when someone like that claims: "People with dividend stocks can't do math". Without ever having calculated an example and without knowing what the respective costs are. In my case, for example, I have absolutely the same costs for dividend and accumulation ETFs (assuming the same ETF as a basis). In other words, it makes ZERO financial difference to me which variant I choose.
PS: yes, I made a few particularly negative assumptions with the 30+ portfolio, a simplification with the 1 ETF portfolio. But I didn't want to go too far with the details, I think it was far enough
••
@Eggplant Confusing. Very confused.
•
11
•