Stingy Investor Search - Contact - Subscribe - Login
  Home | Articles | Links | SNW
A brief history of high yield stocks

Stocks that sport a healthy dividend yield are often derisively called 'widow and orphan' stocks to reflect their stable nature. As it turns out, widows and orphans have been onto a good thing. The desirability of dividends was pointed out by veteran value-investor David Dreman in his recent Forbes article Why Dividends Matter (April 19, 2004). Mr. Dreman updated his long running study of U.S. dividend stocks and, with this new data in hand, I decided to take a second look at a few earlier investigations.

Before diving into the new findings, it is useful to look at the results David Dreman reported in his book Contrarian Investment Strategies: The Next Generation. Here, Mr. Dreman examined high-yield US stocks from January 1 1970 to December 31 1996 and found evidence for outperformance as shown in Table 1. Dreman studied a sample composed of 1,500 of the largest stocks in the US and sorted them into groups of five (quinitiles) based on their price-to-dividend ratio. The price-to-dividend ratio is simply the inverse of a stock's dividend yield. The lowest 20% of price-to-dividend (or highest yielding) stocks were put into quintile one and the highest 20% (or lowest yielders) were put into quintile five. From 1970 to 1996 the best approach was to select the second highest yield group each year which returned 17.5% vs. 14.9% for the market (before taxes and commissions). The highest yielding group also outperformed the market but by a smaller amount.

Table 1: Annual returns by dividend yield from 1970 to 1996 in the U.S.
P/D QuintileHigh Yield 2 3 4 Low Yield Market
Dividend 8.0% 5.4% 3.9% 2.2% 0.7% 4.0%
Capital Gain 8.2% 12.1% 11.2% 11.6% 11.5% 10.9%
Total Return 16.1% 17.5% 15.1% 13.8% 12.2% 14.9%
Data: Contrarian Investment Strategies: The Next Generation

After the internet bubble high yielding stocks continued to perform well. In Dreman's Forbes article he once again looked at 1,500 large US stocks and divided the stocks into five groups (or quintiles) based on yield. However, he only revealed the results for the highest, lowest, and average yield groups. As show in Table 2, high yield investors outperformed the average by about 2% annually over several different time periods.

Table 2: Stocks with high dividend yields have outperformed in the U.S.
Annualized Total Returns
Compustat 1500 10-Year 1994-200320-Year 1984-2003Since Inception 1970-2003
High Yield 13.3% 14.7% 14.5%
Average 11.1% 12.6% 12.6%
Low Yield 9.1% 9.7% 8.8%
S&P500 11.0% 12.9% 11.3%
Data: Dreman Value Management, Forbes Article (April 18 2004)

It is useful to look at another study before getting too happy about a simple high-yield approach. Here I turn to What Works on Wall Street by James O'Shaughnessy and his broad study of high-yield US stocks from 1951 to 1996. O'Shaughnessy split his universe of stocks into groups of ten (deciles) with the top 10% of yields in decile one and the lowest 10% of yields in decile ten. As seen in Table 3, a slight high-yield advantage was evident but avoiding the very highest yielding stocks was again a better strategy. In this case the difference between the market's return of 13.2% and the 14.0% returned by high-yielding stocks was only 0.8%.

Table 3: O'Shaughnessy's High Yield Study
Decile High Yield 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Low Yield
Return 14.0% 13.8% 15.1% 14.3% 13.4% 13.5% 12.6% 13.0% 11.7% 11.8%
Data: US companies from 1952 to1996 with a market cap larger than $150M

One possible reason for the slightly poorer performance of the highest yielding stocks is the increased risk of a dividend cut. Dividend yield is usually based on dividends paid in the previous year divided by the current stock price. Should a company falter, its stock price usually goes down rapidly which pushes up the apparent dividend yield. If the stock is in real trouble then its dividend is often reduced or cut altogether. Suddenly a juicy yield of 10%, based on past dividends, disappears. Dividend investors should try to make sure that their companies are able to earn more than enough to cover their dividends.

Another potential reason for the less than best performance of the highest yielding stocks may be industry concentration. For instance, some industry groups (i.e. utilities) tend to be overly represented in the highest yield group. Here David Dreman provided a very useful follow-up study in his book where he looked at the performance of different dividend-yield groups within each industry and then averaged the performance of these groups across all industries. The results in Table 4 show that buying the highest yielding stocks in each industry has provided better returns than average. It would appear that investors can benefit from a high dividend yield approach and diversification across many industry groups at the same time.

Table 4: Industry Relative returns by dividend yield (1970 to 1996)
P/D Quintile High Yield 2 3 4 Low Yield Market
Dividend 6.5% 5.0%3.9% 3.1%1.6% 4.0%
Capital Gain 10.4% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.1% 10.9%
Total Return 17.0% 16.0% 14.9% 14.1% 12.7% 14.9%
Data: Contrarian Investment Strategies: The Next Generation

Based on the historical record, it appears that conservative widows and clever orphans get it right by selecting high yield stocks. Other investors can reasonably hope that a diversified high-yield approach will continue to fill their plates, even if they may be somewhat less deserving.

Contrarian Investment Strategies: The Next Generation by David Dreman (ISBN 0684813505)
What Works on Wall Street by James O'Shaughnessy (ISBN 0070482462)

Web Sources:
Forbes: Why Dividends Matter

First published in May 2004.

Globe & Mail Articles

 Dividend All-Stars for 2024
 250 Megastars for 2024
 Extreme yields
 The easy way
 Smaller stable dividend
 250 Megastars for 2023
 Champagne portfolio
 Screaming Value
 Blended momentum
 Dividend monster
 Frugal dividend
 Stable dividend
 Speads and recessions
 TSX 60 for value investors
 Looking at 10-year returns
 Watching for a bottom
 Oh, bother!
 Indexing advice
 Media-shy stocks
 Curse of size
 Market uncertainty
 Be even lazier
 Scary beats safe
 Small, illiquid, value
 Use the numbers
 What value is good value?
 Sculpt for value
 Value vs CAPE
 Graham Rules
 CAPE vs PeakE
 Top value ratio
 Low Beta
 Value and dividends
 Walter Schloss
 Try unloved AIG
 Why I'm a value investor
 New world of ETFs
 Low P/Es possible
 10 yielders
 Be happier
 Dividend Downside
 Shiller's P/E
 Copycat investing
 Cashing in on class
 Index roulette
 Theory collides
 Diving too deep
 3 retirement villains
 Scourge of inflation
 Economic omens
 Analyst Expectations
 Value stock scarcity
 It's all in the index
 How to pick good funds
 Low Beta Wins
 Hunt for dividend stocks
 Think garage sale

MoneySaver Articles
 2 Graham Stocks for 2018
 2 Stingy Stocks for 2017
 2 Graham Stocks for 2017
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2016
 5 Graham Stocks for 2016
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2015
 3 Graham Stocks for 2015
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2014
 4 Graham Stocks for 2014
 8 Stingy Stocks for 2013
 6 Graham Stocks for 2013
 9 Stingy Stocks for 2012
 8 Graham Stocks for 2012
 Simple Way 2011
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2011
 7 Graham Stocks for 2011
 Simple Way 2010
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2010
 8 Graham Stocks for 2010
 Simple Way 2009
 Timing Temptation
 19 Stingy Stocks for 2009
 4 Graham Stocks for 2009
 Simple Way 2008
 Active at Passive Prices
 Unbundling ETFs 2008
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2008
 5 Graham Stocks for 2008
 Is your index too active?
 Graham's Simple Way
 Canadian Graham Stocks
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2007
 8 Graham Stocks for 2007
 Top SPPs
 The Simple Way
 A hole in your IPO?
 Monkey Business
 8 Stingy Stocks for 2006
 Graham Stock Gainers
 Blue-Chip Blues
 Are Dividends Safe?
 SPPs for 2005
 Graham's Simplest Way
 Selling Graham Stocks
 RRSP Money Market Funds
 Stingy Stocks for 2005
 High Performance Graham
 Intelligent Indexing
 Unbundling Canadian ETFs
 A history of yield
 A Dynamic Duo
 Canadian Graham Stock
 Dividends at Risk
 Thrifty Value Stocks
 Stocks in Short Supply
 The New Dividend
 Hunting Goodwill
 SPPs for 2003
 RRSP: don't panic
 Desirable Dividends
 Stingy Selections 2003
 10 Graham Picks
 Growth Eh?
 Timing Disaster
 Dangerous Diversification
 The Coffee Can Portfolio
 Down with the dogs
 Stingy Selections
 Frugal Funds
 Graham Revisited
 Just Spend It
 Ticker Temptation
 Stock Mortality
 Focus on Fees
 SPPs for the Long Term
 Seeking Solid Stocks
 Relative Strength
 The VR Approach
 The Irrational Investor
 Value Investing

Old MS Articles
 Cdn Top 200 2018
 Cdn Top 200 2017
 Cdn Top 200 2016
 Cdn Top 200 2015
 Cdn Top 200 2014
 Cdn Top 200 2013
 Cdn Top 200 2012
 Cdn Top 200 2011
 Cdn Top 200 2010
 Cdn Top 200 2009
 Cdn Top 200 2008
 Cdn Top 200 2007
 Cdn Top 200 2006
 Cdn Top 200 2005
 US Top 500 2018
 US Top 500 2017
 US Top 500 2016
 US Top 500 2015
 US Top 500 2014
 US Top 500 2013
 US Top 500 2012
 US Top 500 2011
 US Top 500 2010
 US Top 500 2009
 US Top 500 2008
 US Top 500 2007
 US Top 1000 2006
 Dividends 100 2017
 Dividends 100 2016
 Retirement 100 2015
 Retirement 100 2014
 Retirement 100 2013
 Retirement 100 2012
 Retirement 100 2011
 Retirement 100 2010
 Income 100 2009
 Income 100 2008
 Income 100 2007
 Top Trusts 2006
 Top Trusts 2005
 Hot Potato
 Buffett Buys
 Stocks that pay
 Value in the S&P500
 Where to invest $100k
 Where to invest $10k
 Summer Simple Way
 A crystal ball for stocks?
 Cheap & safe
 Risky business
 Dividend investing
 Value investing
 Momentum investing
 Low P/E P/B
 Dividend growers
 Graham's prescription
 The case for optimism
 Wicked investments
 Simply spectacular
 Small stocks, big profits
 Value that sizzles
 So simple it works
 No assembly required
 Investing by the book
 Invest like the masters
 A simple way to get rich
 Stocks for cannibals
 Car bites dogs
 So easy, so profitable
 Dogs of the Dow
 Money for nothing
 Yield of dreams
 Return of the master

Advisor's Edge Articles
 Passive Rebundling
 Doing the math

Flip Books

About Us | Legal | Contact Us
Disclaimers: Consult with a qualified investment adviser before trading. Past performance is a poor indicator of future performance. The information on this site, and in its related newsletters, is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, financial advice or recommendations. The information on this site is in no way guaranteed for completeness, accuracy or in any other way. More...