Not All Dividends are the Same

The Echelon Insights Team • Nov 15, 2021

There is little doubt that at the core of most every Canadian’s portfolio is a healthy allocation to dividend-paying equities. And for many good reasons. Dividends enjoy preferential tax treatment, notably Canadian dividend-paying companies. Bond yields had been declining since the 1980s, enticing more investors to harvest cash flow from equities instead of bonds. The volatility of dividend strategies has been less than the overall market and the returns have been comparable. Cash flow, better taxation, returns, and less risk… that’s like a four of a kind in the investment world. Not to mention, when investors have ventured into growth pockets in the Canadian market, the experience has not been great. With memories of Nortel, Encana, Biovail, Potash, and Research in Motion, there has been enough boom/busts to make any investor return to the warm comfort of their dividend payers. 


As managers of a few dividend strategies, we are squarely in the camp that dividend-paying companies should be at the core of most portfolios, whether we are managing them or not. But this isn’t a pompom ethos about dividends, instead we are going to share our views on a risk for dividend strategies – namely rising yields. A good portion of the performance attributes that dividend strategies have delivered for investors over the past decades can be explained by falling bond yields. Many dividend companies are treated as bond proxies or as long duration investments, so when yields fall, their price tends to rise. That has been a tailwind for many years but is starting to become a headwind as yields move higher. 


But not all dividend-paying companies have the same sensitivity to changes in bond yields. Some are very sensitive, which we refer to as ‘Interest Rate Sensitives.’ Some are less sensitive to yields – or may actually benefit from rising yields – and we refer to those as ‘Cyclical Yield.’ As the name suggests, Cyclical Yield dividend-payers tend to be in industries that are more economically sensitive. If the economy is doing well, they should do well and bond yields should rise. Conversely, Interest Rate Sensitives are less sensitive to economic activity and react more to yields in the opposite direction. 

Based on historical correlations and beta (slope) to changes in bond yields, we sorted dividend-paying sub-industries. This ranking incorporated a 10+ year period and a focus on periods of rising yields (there have not been too many over the past decade). This helps provide a guide for which companies or industries in the Cyclical Yield grouping can better handle rising yields. Conversely, those that would benefit should yields move lower are in the Interest Rate Sensitive group. 


If you believe, as we do, that bond yields have embarked on an upward trajectory due to solid economic growth and inflationary pressures, tilting more towards Cyclical Yield would be prudent. Of course, this does come at a risk. Cyclical companies that pay dividends do not do well if the economy slows. Their cyclical nature does make the dividend sustainability a bit more tenuous, while many Interest Rate Sensitives are at less risk from an economic slowdown. A combination from both buckets makes for a better dividend portfolio, with perhaps a tilt towards the Cyclical Yield companies in the current environment. 


It really does come down to the future path of bond yields. In the chart below, we tracked the historical performance of the Canadian Cyclical Yield industries vs the Interest Rate Sensitives. The line rises when Cyclical Yields are outperforming and vice versa. This line has a very strong correlation to Canadian 10-year bond yields. It’s worth noting that this trend of outperformance by Cyclical Yield dividend payers started about a year and a half ago, after really underperforming the Interest Rate Sensitive dividend payers for most of the 2010-2020 decade. 


There is also a historically high valuation discount among Cyclical Yield compared to Interest Rate Sensitives. Historically, there is usually a discount as a dollar of cyclical earnings is not worth as much as a dollar of more stable earnings. However, this discount is near the biggest over the past decade. 

Investment implications 

We believe that in the next few years, much of the relative performance between dividend strategies will be determined by the direction in bond yields and the balance between Cyclical Yield and Interest Rate Sensitives. After all, not all dividends are treated equally by changes in yields. Inflation has picked up, the economic recovery has solid momentum, and central banks appear to have started to tighten/taper. Dividend portfolios should have a mix of both Cyclical Yield and Interest Rate Sensitives, but for now we believe the tilt should be towards Cyclical Yield. 


Source: Charts are sourced to Bloomberg L.P. and Purpose Investments Inc. 


The contents of this publication were researched, written and produced by Purpose Investments Inc. and are used by Echelon Wealth Partners Inc. for information purposes only. 


This report is authored by Craig Basinger, Chief Market Strategist, Purpose Investments Inc. 



The contents of this publication were researched, written and produced by Purpose Investments Inc. and are used herein under a non-exclusive license by Echelon Wealth Partners Inc. (“Echelon”) for information purposes only. The statements and statistics contained herein are based on material believed to be reliable but there is no guarantee they are accurate or complete. Particular investments or trading strategies should be evaluated relative to each individual's objectives in consultation with their Echelon representative. 


Echelon Wealth Partners Ltd. 


The opinions expressed in this report are the opinions of the author and readers should not assume they reflect the opinions or recommendations of Echelon Wealth Partners Ltd. or its affiliates. Assumptions, opinions and estimates constitute the author's judgment as of the date of this material and are subject to change without notice. We do not warrant the completeness or accuracy of this material, and it should not be relied upon as such. Before acting on any recommendation, you should consider whether it is suitable for your particular circumstances and, if necessary, seek professional advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The comments contained herein are general in nature and are not intended to be, nor should be construed to be, legal or tax advice to any particular individual. Accordingly, individuals should consult their own legal or tax advisors for advice with respect to the tax consequences to them. 


Purpose Investments Inc. 


Purpose Investments Inc. is a registered securities entity. Commissions, trailing commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with investment funds. Please read the prospectus before investing. If the securities are purchased or sold on a stock exchange, you may pay more or receive less than the current net asset value. Investment funds are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated. 


Forward Looking Statements 


Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections based on beliefs and assumptions made by author. These statements involve risks and uncertainties and are not guarantees of future performance or results and no assurance can be given that these estimates and expectations will prove to have been correct, and actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed, implied or projected in such forward-looking statements. Assumptions, opinions and estimates constitute the author’s judgment as of the date of this material and are subject to change without notice. Neither Purpose Investments nor Echelon Partners warrant the completeness or accuracy of this material, and it should not be relied upon as such. Before acting on any recommendation, you should consider whether it is suitable for your particular circumstances and, if necessary, seek professional advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. These estimates and expectations involve risks and uncertainties and are not guarantees of future performance or results and no assurance can be given that these estimates and expectations will prove to have been correct, and actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed, implied or projected in such forward-looking statements. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed, that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise the forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. 

Before acting on any recommendation, you should consider whether it is suitable for your particular circumstances and, if necessary, seek professional advice. 


The particulars contained herein were obtained from sources which we believe are reliable, but are not guaranteed by us and may be incomplete. This is not an official publication or research report of either Echelon Partners or Purpose Investments, and this is not to be used as a solicitation in any jurisdiction. 


This document is not for public distribution, is for informational purposes only, and is not being delivered to you in the context of an offering of any securities, nor is it a recommendation or solicitation to buy, hold or sell any security. 


Echelon’s Insight Team


Echelon’s Insight Team includes members in various departments such as Wealth Management, Capital Markets, Marketing, Talent, and Compliance who have subject matter expertise and collaborate together to build quality content to help our clients. This team approach helps us ensure content is produced that is meaningful, accurate and timely.

06 May, 2024
Take your pick. There is no shortage of both good and bad news floating about the financial markets. To be fair, this is always the case. The hard part is understanding which side is stronger today and which side will be stronger tomorrow. With markets up low to mid-single digits following a very strong Q4 finish to 2023, most would agree the optimists are carrying the day at the moment. It is not just rose-coloured glasses; there is good news out there. Economic growth signs or momentum appear to be improving year-to-date. Dial back a few quarters, and the U.S. economy remained resilient while other economies softened or were rather lacklustre, including Canada, Europe, Japan, and China, to highlight some of the biggies. Today, while Canada is struggling, momentum in the U.S. has moved even higher, and there are signs of improvement in most jurisdictions.
29 Apr, 2024
There are three things you should rarely ever bet against: the Leaf’s opposing team in the playoffs, the American consumer’s ability to spend, and corporate profits. As we are now about halfway through U.S. earnings season, once again, positive surprises remain the norm; 81% have beaten. It's a bit better than the 20-year average of 75%. The fact is that companies are good at managing analysts’ expectations. At least enough to beat them when the numbers hit the tape. The size of the positive surprises have been encouraging as well, at just under 10%. The highest surprise magnitude in some time.  One of our reservations on the sustainability of this market rally over the past couple of quarters has been the flat earnings revisions. In other words, global markets are up over 20% but earnings estimates have remained flat or tilted down slightly. More often than not, markets trend in the same direction as earnings revisions. Earnings get revised up when companies raise guidance and/or analysts become more encouraged about growth prospects. That is a good thing for markets. Obviously, downward revisions are bad. Yet estimates have remained very flat as markets marched higher, a challenging combination.
22 Apr, 2024
The oil market has been interesting lately and, to the surprise of many, has been the biggest silent outperformer this year. There is no shortage of geopolitical events to choose from that’s leading to a higher risk premium in oil with Brent breaking $90, whether it’s the Houthis missile attacks in the Red Sea leading to a massive re-route of trade, Ukraine’s drone strikes on Russian refineries, and the latest escalation between Israel and Iran leading to some news outlets using WWIII as click bait-y headlines. Given the run-up in oil prices, Canadian oil equities have clearly benefitted from the much higher torque. But there is a layer of even better news: The Transmountain Expansion (TMX) continues to look to be in operation by May, which would lead to much better pricing on the Western Canadian Select (WCS). With the current setup for the oil markets, some key questions that we often get from investors are: How sustainable is the rally in Canadian energy names? To determine if the oil equities are overstretched, we can look at the debt-adjusted cash flow (DACF) multiples of the major integrated oil names and see how the valuation has shifted in light of the recent oil move. From Exhibit 1, the DACF multiples for the Canadian integrated have been fairly range-bound over the last year, also in line with WTI, which has been in the $70 - $85 range. As a starting point, we can infer that the valuations of the companies have been commensurate with the movements in the underlying oil price deck and in line with where the equities should trade in the cycle historically over the last couple of years. Typically, in the commodities cycle, higher prices are usually coupled with lower multiples as market participants will usually price in lower normalized prices and vice versa, so a cause of concern would be if valuation starts trending towards the 6.5x – 7.0x+ area if oil prices continue to stay in the upper bounds of the $70 - $90 range or higher.
MORE POSTS →
Share by: