1Anno
😅 but does not reflect the name
•
11
•
1Anno
@Doe Why? It doesn't look so bad after all. Double-digit annual growth and a good dividend.
••
@fund_commander_1360 Yup, I agree and they have been paying out regularly for a very long time.
••
1Anno
@fund_commander_1360 so when I look at Getquin, I see the following text...
The dividend growth in relation to the previous financial year is -45.49 %. The average dividend growth over the last 5 years is -16.94%... without looking into it further, this does not reflect the name.
The dividend growth in relation to the previous financial year is -45.49 %. The average dividend growth over the last 5 years is -16.94%... without looking into it further, this does not reflect the name.
••
1Anno
@Doe The figures look so bad because perverse dividends were paid in the past. There were years with 70% dividends. Either something is wrong in the data or these figures were really paid. No wonder it looks bad when you go from 70% to 19%. In the long term, however, everything was stable.
•
11
•1Anno
@stock_whiz_reiner I recently invested a good amount in it. I also did some research on the company beforehand. Looks reputable so far.
It's just annoying to have to pay a 5% spread when buying... But I think I'll get it back quickly with growth and dividends :-)
It's just annoying to have to pay a 5% spread when buying... But I think I'll get it back quickly with growth and dividends :-)
••