Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree 100% with that. Go for an ETF. Invest over time, eyes closed. A broad-based ETF will trend up over time, as it tracks the health of the wider economy.
I'd never invest in individual stocks as they can go up as well as all the way down to zero. If you did, however, invest in individual stocks, you'd need to manage your investments closely, set a stop loss and monitor your positions daily.
Honestly, for a stock to reach zero, you'd have to not watch it for a few quarters. Also, I don't know what's so difficult about checking your stocks each morning like you check the news/weather. Everyone has the world in their hands now a days so I don't see what's difficult about that - especially since its your money.
Why limit yourself to dividend plays if your ultimate goal is more retirement money and possibly legacy?
Income is my #1 goal but I do not limit myself to dividend plays.
I want to move over to dividend growth investing but I do not agree with all of their rules. For instance they are all fleeing AT&T right now because T did not increase their divy this year.
T is my 3rd largest holding and I'm staying put with it
Plus I like to gamble a little and own 6000 shares of NLBS.
I also believe a person should have 100 oz of silver before buying any stocks. After attaining 100k in the market you need another 100 oz of silver. So 100 oz of silver for every 100k in the market.
Income is my #1 goal but I do not limit myself to dividend plays.
I want to move over to dividend growth investing but I do not agree with all of their rules. For instance they are all fleeing AT&T right now because T did not increase their divy this year.
T is my 3rd largest holding and I'm staying put with it
Plus I like to gamble a little and own 6000 shares of NLBS.
I also believe a person should have 100 oz of silver before buying any stocks. After attaining 100k in the market you need another 100 oz of silver. So 100 oz of silver for every 100k in the market.
i think your first step would be accepting that you are clueless when it comes to investing.
I'm asking for advice yet you didn't seem to give any.
The problem with investing advice on these boards is almost everyone has a bias toward giving advice based on what they would do based on their personal situation. It's not necessarily intentional. It's just that we don't know you or enough of your financial situation to give good advice.
The problem with investing advice on these boards is almost everyone has a bias toward giving advice based on what they would do based on their personal situation. It's not necessarily intentional. It's just that we don't know you or enough of your financial situation to give good advice.
I agree with you and understand that. I love that we all have different opinions. I don't want advice for "my situation", I just want to know what works for you.
You’ve been given advice, this is 6 pages long, so at the end of 6 pages, your answer is priority number one collect physical silver?
No. You invest the way you want. But for me, I'm going to have an oz for every thousand I have in the market. I think it's wise. You may believe differently. It works for me.
Here is a side-by-side comparison between UTZ and BGS for the various ratios.
Ratio: UTZ vs. BGS
P/E: 297 vs. 13
P/forward E: 40 vs. 12
PEG: 4.2 vs. 0.8
DY: 0.89% vs. 6.73%
Payout ratio: 61% vs. 99%
Dividend coverage: 163% vs. 101%
Gross profit margin: 35% vs. 24%
Operating profit margin: 4% vs. 14%
Cash flow/share: $0.08 vs. $2.99
Book value/share: $3.89 vs. $13.13
LT debt/capital: 22 vs. 68
LT debt/equity: 88 vs. 214
Return on capital: 0.35% vs. 4.18%
Return on assets: 0.2% vs. 3.8%
If you don't understand the significance of these ratios, ask.
Currently, the price of a UTZ share would require 297 years of earnings to pay for it. BGS, only 13 years. As a value investor, I like to see this ratio under 20, and even better under 15.
However, fast growing companies can have a higher P/E as they can grow their earnings into that price. The PEG ratio (P divided by earnings growth) captures that factor. The lower the PEG, the better.
Dividend yield is very low for UTZ, but they provide better coverage for that dividend than does BGS at this time. Payout ratio and coverage ratio are reciprocals. (1/payout ratio = coverage ratio) BGS is essentially paying all of their earnings out as a dividend at this time.
The rest of the ratios show how efficient management is at use of capital. UTZ has a better gross profit margin, but very low operating profit margin. Why? Maybe not so efficient in turning profit into cash flow; IDK. Eight cents of cash flow per share versus nearly $3 for BGS.
And so on.
Those numbers for UTZ are a screaming buy!
Thanks for posting this. Just got of SeekingAlpha checking out bgs. Looks like a great stock.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
