If you’d invested $100,000 in the S&P 500 back in 1982, it would have been worth $2.3 million by the end of 2011. If you would have invested that same amount in dividend payers, you’d have $4.3 million. Not bad. And that’s where most investors stop. But if you’d invested the same amount of cash using a simple strategy that too many investors often ignore, then it would have been worth $6.7 million. Seem too good to be true? It’s not. #-ad_banner-#Many investors searching for the best total returns will simply look for high-yielding stocks. But dividends don’t… Read More
If you’d invested $100,000 in the S&P 500 back in 1982, it would have been worth $2.3 million by the end of 2011. If you would have invested that same amount in dividend payers, you’d have $4.3 million. Not bad. And that’s where most investors stop. But if you’d invested the same amount of cash using a simple strategy that too many investors often ignore, then it would have been worth $6.7 million. Seem too good to be true? It’s not. #-ad_banner-#Many investors searching for the best total returns will simply look for high-yielding stocks. But dividends don’t tell the whole story — not even half of it. If you’re looking for more cash from your investments, you should be looking at all of the ways a company distributes its cash. Don’t get me wrong — dividends can be a great indicator of company health. From 1972 through 2011, members of the S&P that don’t pay dividends returned just 1.4% per year, turning a $1,000 investment into just $1,710 according to research by Ned Davis. Meanwhile, companies that pay dividends returned 8.6% annually — significantly more than those that did not. Dividends are obviously a key ingredient to… Read More