No me da la vida para ver tanto video, tantos artículos y tantas tesis de empresas 
Pero siempre gracias.
3 Me gusta
David, ahora en versión YouTuber
1 me gusta
2 Me gusta
No se si habéis visto su último video de YT donde explica su portfolio.
Un YOC del 11%!!
Otro nivel.
Como bien otros compis habéis comentado en el pasado, no hace aportaciones. Metió 45k $ creo y a reinvertir dividendos.
2 Me gusta
2 Me gusta
1 me gusta
Marchando unas MRK y LMT
7 Me gusta
3 Me gusta
8 Me gusta
Me gustan los análisis que ponéis de esta gente DTA
En el caso de PRU, las tengo a un precio medio de 88,31 $ y si bajan a 92,00 $ (según DTA, 95 $ ya sería “precio de ganga”) pienso comprar más hasta que representen el 0,9 % de mi cartera. Tengo varias empresas del mismo sector, tanto en € como en $ como en L y no me quiero sobrecargar.
3 Me gusta
Ya sabemos a qué edad se retiró: 55.
"I was offered a “package” when I was 55. I had not been considering retirement any time soon, and at first I rejected the package, because I was also offered a “lateral transfer.” (That’s like a running play that loses a foot or two but goes into the books as “no gain.”)
Anyway, I/we began to think about the financial realities, and build scenarios that included taking SS at 62 (7 years in the future at the time). We worked with a financial advisor (only time I’ve ever done that), who gave us his services for free because he was trying out some new software. Everything was based on traditional “What’s Your Number” thinking, little on income planning the way we all do it now.
Long story short(er), I just fell on the line for “enough” when viewed that way. So I decided to accept the package, which they held open for me for a few months while we thought about it.
Best decision (except marrying my wife) I’ve ever made."
11 Me gusta
Pues se anima con los ETF
8 Me gusta
es muy interesante ver su evolución, no solo por lo del ETF sino por lo de su pensamiento en la jubilación de su ocupación principal.
Pero claro, está en un entorno (EEUU con un empleo de buen nivel) donde las opciones abundan por su presencia, no como en otros sitios. A mi me da que pensar y me devuelve a la idea de irme de España,
3 Me gusta
Nuevo de DVK.
8 Me gusta
3 Me gusta
“**There are three primary ways to calculate returns: **
(1) price change (aka capital appreciation); (2) price change + dividends; (3) price change + dividends + dividend reinvestment.
Each has its uses. The most common method, by far, is price (alone). That’s what practically all charts show. The most common comparisons on TV, in articles and videos, etc. are price-only comparisons. Comparisons to benchmarks (like the S&P 500) are almost always price-only comparisons. The talking head on TV might add, “…plus the dividends, of course…” , but they are not often shown.
When you see a statement like, “Over many years, dividends have provided 40% of stock returns,” that’s #2: price + dividends. (For 1950-2020, the contribution of dividends is 42%). To be more specific, it should say annual returns, because re-investing dividends or not makes relatively little difference in just a single year. (Source: am.jpmorgan.com/…)
When you see a statement like, “Over many years, dividends are responsible for 80% of stock returns,” or any number over 50%, that’s #3: price change + dividends + dividends reinvested. The compounding of dividends by reinvesting them curves upward over the years, so if you have a long-enough timeframe, the contribution of dividends ranges toward 90% or above if they have been reinvested along the way.
Many sources (and article writers, and video makers, and talking heads on TV) say “total” return” without specifying what they are referring to. I hate that, because it makes a difference. The more years are in the timeframe, the bigger difference it makes.
I don’t consider dividends to be “new money,” because the portfolio generates them. In accumulation, they’re not being extracted, so the portfolio’s returns all come from within the portfolio. To make that clear when I write, I specify “no new outside money,” because I know that some (many?) people do consider dividends to be new money.
I just think the best practice is to be explicit about which returns one is talking about, but it is not very common to do so. Yet people make comparisons that may become distorted, because two different sets of “total returns” are being calculated differently, but nobody notices that oranges are being compared to apples.
Dave"
5 Me gusta
Buenas, en mi caso particular mido el rendimiento logrado incluyendo dividendos, pero dado que invierto mas de lo que me genera la cartera no me complico mucho con las cifras, considero la cifra total invertida a fecha de hoy mas dividendos del año mas resultado de ventas y la comparo con el valor total actual de la cartera.
2 Me gusta