该内容来自:投资组合
回购或股息?新的研究争论给了更大的推动力
“我们继续产生充足的免费现金流量...通过股息和股票回购提供股东回报，”沃尔玛首席执行官Mike Duke（如图）。但哪个更好，回购或股息的冷现金？最近的标准普尔数据有一个相当令人惊讶的答案。
当沃尔玛在3月份宣布增加21%的股息时，它宣称计划在本财年通过股息向股东返还超过50亿美元。“我们继续产生充足的自由现金流……通过分红和股票回购给股东带来回报，”首席执行官迈克•杜克宣称。
像巨型零售商一样，越来越多的公司已经通过股息问题或增加，股票回购或两者来利用越来越多的公司攻击其巨大的现金来奖励股东。大约510家公司在第一季度飙升股息，而2010年第一季度与399季度相比，标准贸易署报告。回购也在回复。去年第四季度，股票回购从2009年第四季度飙升超过80％，达到864亿美元。S＆P于1998年开始跟踪数据，这是S＆P Indices的高级指数分析师霍华德Silverblatt表示，这是最大的百分比和美元增加。股东几乎无法抱怨回购或股息徒步旅行，但投资者是否与另一个而不是其他人？甚至两者都更好？有些令人惊讶的是，最近的标准数据声明，尽管后者的冷现金汇款，投资者的价格比股息增加更好。但是，只有当公司致力于经常检讨其股份时，就就是这种情况。在去年年底发布的一项研究中，评级机构指出，353分标500 500公司在截至2010年6月30日止三年中购买了备份股票和有偿股息。九十五只刚刚回购库存，39只支付现金股息，13岁 neither. (To be sure, this was an extraordinary period for the markets, encompassing a nearly 50 percent drop in the S&P 500, followed by a 15-month rally that reversed the bulk of the losses. Nonetheless, S&P says this is the only period it studied.) Companies that did buybacks and nothing else during the three years generated an average unweighted total return (any dividends plus stock price gains or losses) of –10.5 percent. That compares with –12.7 percent for companies that only issued dividends. Those that paid dividends and also did a stock buyback came out worst: –21.3 percent. What’s most telling is that companies that did “high-frequency” buybacks — in nine or more of 36 quarters — performed by far the best. Their total returns fell just 4.4 percent. “Those companies that dipped their toe in buybacks did not do as well as the ones that were aggressive,” contends a co-author of the study, Todd Rosenbluth, an S&P equity analyst. What concerns his colleague Silverblatt is that investors may so eagerly bid up stock prices to reward buybacks that companies will do even more buybacks, as they did in 2006 and ’07. That, in turn, would put a damper on cash dividends. “They are separate but connected,” he says. “Buybacks are nothing more than a short-term benefit to shareholders.” Adds Rosenbluth, “Dividends are stickier.” Nevertheless, a McKinsey & Co. study published May 4 concludes that buybacks and dividends have an equal impact on share prices. What counts, says the consulting firm’s head of corporate finance research, Tim Koller, is the amount of a company’s cash flow distribution, not whether it is paid out in dividends or buybacks. McKinsey found that earnings multiples are essentially the same for companies having similar total payouts, no matter what their mix of dividends and share repurchases. For 50 years companies have paid out about 60 percent of their earnings, on average, in dividends and buybacks. But until the early 1980s, less than 10 percent consisted of share repurchases; now they constitute 50 to 60 percent. McKinsey says the reason for the shift is that companies want flexibility on payouts and that investors expect dividend cuts only in dire circumstances but are less sensitive to curtailed buybacks.
像巨型零售商一样，越来越多的公司已经通过股息问题或增加，股票回购或两者来利用越来越多的公司攻击其巨大的现金来奖励股东。大约510家公司在第一季度飙升股息，而2010年第一季度与399季度相比，标准贸易署报告。回购也在回复。去年第四季度，股票回购从2009年第四季度飙升超过80％，达到864亿美元。S＆P于1998年开始跟踪数据，这是S＆P Indices的高级指数分析师霍华德Silverblatt表示，这是最大的百分比和美元增加。股东几乎无法抱怨回购或股息徒步旅行，但投资者是否与另一个而不是其他人？甚至两者都更好？有些令人惊讶的是，最近的标准数据声明，尽管后者的冷现金汇款，投资者的价格比股息增加更好。但是，只有当公司致力于经常检讨其股份时，就就是这种情况。在去年年底发布的一项研究中，评级机构指出，353分标500 500公司在截至2010年6月30日止三年中购买了备份股票和有偿股息。九十五只刚刚回购库存，39只支付现金股息，13岁 neither. (To be sure, this was an extraordinary period for the markets, encompassing a nearly 50 percent drop in the S&P 500, followed by a 15-month rally that reversed the bulk of the losses. Nonetheless, S&P says this is the only period it studied.) Companies that did buybacks and nothing else during the three years generated an average unweighted total return (any dividends plus stock price gains or losses) of –10.5 percent. That compares with –12.7 percent for companies that only issued dividends. Those that paid dividends and also did a stock buyback came out worst: –21.3 percent. What’s most telling is that companies that did “high-frequency” buybacks — in nine or more of 36 quarters — performed by far the best. Their total returns fell just 4.4 percent. “Those companies that dipped their toe in buybacks did not do as well as the ones that were aggressive,” contends a co-author of the study, Todd Rosenbluth, an S&P equity analyst. What concerns his colleague Silverblatt is that investors may so eagerly bid up stock prices to reward buybacks that companies will do even more buybacks, as they did in 2006 and ’07. That, in turn, would put a damper on cash dividends. “They are separate but connected,” he says. “Buybacks are nothing more than a short-term benefit to shareholders.” Adds Rosenbluth, “Dividends are stickier.” Nevertheless, a McKinsey & Co. study published May 4 concludes that buybacks and dividends have an equal impact on share prices. What counts, says the consulting firm’s head of corporate finance research, Tim Koller, is the amount of a company’s cash flow distribution, not whether it is paid out in dividends or buybacks. McKinsey found that earnings multiples are essentially the same for companies having similar total payouts, no matter what their mix of dividends and share repurchases. For 50 years companies have paid out about 60 percent of their earnings, on average, in dividends and buybacks. But until the early 1980s, less than 10 percent consisted of share repurchases; now they constitute 50 to 60 percent. McKinsey says the reason for the shift is that companies want flexibility on payouts and that investors expect dividend cuts only in dire circumstances but are less sensitive to curtailed buybacks.
尽管如此，研究仍然是回购的最大论据 - 他们增加股票价格，因为他们增加了每股收益。麦肯锡解释说，虽然回购确实增加了每股盈利，但麦肯锡解释所以通过公司的价格收益比率下降，因为它需要额外的杠杆来购买股票，成为一个风险的投资。净值净值：零。麦肯锡还注意到：更频繁，公司在价格高涨时购买股票。