Build an income portfolio that could set you up for life

By Phil Oakley Jun 22, 2012

Phil Oakley

Share with
friends:

Comments (24) Print this article

For most of us, the main point of investing is to build a pot of money that will provide us with a comfortable lifestyle in retirement.

Some people find it hard to get their heads around this idea. The future seems so distant, and so unknowable, and the sums bandied about so huge, that there seems no point in even trying to save.

It doesn’t help that there’s a whole industry of asset managers with an interest in making it look very complicated so that you feel obliged to hand your savings over to them in exchange for a hefty fee.

But the truth is, building a decent retirement pot isn’t that complicated. In fact, I’m going to explain everything you need to know.

The three things you need to build yourself a retirement pot

There is a proven way to build your wealth that requires three main things.

• Assets that generate meaningful income streams; 
• The reinvestment of the income;
• Patience.

What we’re talking about here is using the power of compound interest (earning interest on interest) over a period of at least 20 years, to do all the hard work for you.

It’s said – although no one knows for sure - that Albert Einstein once described compound interest as the eighth wonder of the world. When we show you what dividend re-investment and compounding can do for your savings pot, you may feel inclined to agree.

Building a portfolio that can meet your future income needs takes a bit of effort to set up. But once you’ve done it, it just needs monitoring.

Let’s be clear: this is not a strategy for those who want to get rich quick, or who are seeking instant gratification from the stock market.

This is a strategy for income that is mostly independent of the casino-like workings of today’s stock market. It also gets you to focus on the underlying businesses or assets that produce the income you are seeking, rather than constantly agonising over yo-yoing share prices. What happens to the capital value of your investments is of secondary importance.

Let’s get started.


Sign up for a 3-week FREE trial of MoneyWeek
and get the following free as well

"The only financial publication I could not be without."
John Lang, Director, Tower Hill Associates Ltd


First, you select around 10-15 investments from different sectors of the economy. This is to ensure that you adequately diversify your risks. One caveat here: we are ignoring sectors that we don’t properly understand or which are highly leveraged (such as banks) and also cyclical industries (such as mining companies).

Instead, we are looking for companies that are capable of maintaining or growing their dividends under most economic scenarios.

Once selected, you put an equal amount of money into each investment. There is no benchmarking here. We’re not trying to outperform an index, just grow our future income.

Below, I’ve put together a sample portfolio of 16 companies from different sectors of the UK stock market. (I’ve changed the names as I don’t want to get into specific stock tips here – instead I want to show you the maths behind this strategy) with their current dividend yields and dividend cover ratios.

CompanySectorYieldDiv Cover
Mobile Phones Limited Telecoms 5.40% 1.6
Bob's General Store Retail 5.10% 2.1
Tobacco Company Tobacco 4.00% 1.5
Buses & Trains Transport 4.80% 2.8
Drugs and Medicine Co Pharmaceuticals 4.80% 1.6
Insurance Company prefs Insurance 7.00% 46.2
Land & Property Rentals Property 5.20% 2.1
Bill's Cleaning Products Household Goods 3.70% 2
The Food Making Company Food Producers 6.20% 2.4
Fizzy Pop Beverages 5.60% 1.9
TV Company Broadcasting 3.40% 1.8
Cranes and Co Construction 6.10% 1.9
The Local Boozer Restaurants 4.60% 2.1
Cakes & Pies Food Retail 3.90% 2
Gas & Electricity Works Utilities 4.90% 1.7
The Oil Company Oil 4.80% 3.1

All I’m hoping for here is that the underlying businesses are good enough to maintain their current dividend payouts. If they increase, that’s all well and good, but it’s not important for this strategy to work.

Now see what happens if we hold this portfolio for 20 years and invest £5,000 in each stock. We assume that the share prices don’t change, that the dividend payment remains constant throughout, and that you reinvest all dividend payments.

CompanyInitial value (£)Income yr1Yield on costIncome yr 20Yield on costEnd value (£)
Mobile Phones Limited 5,000 269 5.40% 728 14.60% 14,256
Bob's General Store 5,000 256 5.10% 661 13.20% 13,574
Tobacco Company 5,000 199 4.00% 419 8.40% 10,379
Buses & Trains 5,000 241 4.80% 590 11.80% 12,825
Drugs and Medicine Co 5,000 239 4.80% 578 11.60% 12,701
Insurance Company prefs 5,000 348 7.00% 1249 25.00% 19,195
Land & Property Rentals 5,000 258 5.20% 673 13.50% 13,700
Bill's Cleaning Products 5,000 186 3.70% 372 7.40% 10,379
The Food Making Company 5,000 309 6.20% 966 19.30% 16,595
Fizzy Pop 5,000 279 5.60% 784 15.70% 14,822
TV Company 5,000 171 3.40% 325 6.50% 9,809
Cranes and Co 5,000 307 6.10% 954 19.10% 16,482
The Local Boozer 5,000 231 4.60% 545 10.90% 12,339
Cakes & Pies 5,000 195 3.90% 405 8.10% 10,761
Gas & Electricity Works 5,000 247 4.90% 618 12.40% 13,125
The Oil Company 5,000 238 4.80% 575 11.50% 12,667
Total 80,000 3,975 5.00% 10,443 13.10% 213,608

What you can see in action is the power of dividend reinvestment and compound interest over time. Your £80,000 initial investment provides you with an annual income of £10,443 or a yield on cost of 13.1%. The value of your capital has increased to £213,608.

Hold for 30 years and you get an annual income of £17,226 or a yield on cost of 21.5%. The value of your capital would be £352,784.

As you can see from the table, the higher the starting yield, the better the long-term results. Obviously, you have to be careful not to buy stocks with yields that are unsustainably high. But if you preferred, you could put together a portfolio of higher-yielding utility companies for example, and get a better return than in the example above. It’s up to you as to how much diversification you want.

A better, cheaper approach to investing

Once you’ve done your homework and selected good companies with decent, sustainable dividend yields, you can put your fund on autopilot. All you have to do is to keep monitoring the health of the businesses you have bought – can they keep paying you a dividend? As long as that’s the case, there’s no need to worry about the daily movements of share prices.

For me, this is what investing in shares is all about and it’s how I manage my own portfolio. The other good thing is that it’s not expensive.

You are not paying an annual management fee of 1.5% plus other hidden expenses as you would with an equity income fund. And most stockbrokers will allow you to set up a dividend reinvestment option on FTSE 350 stocks. For example, TD Direct Investing charges only £1.50 commission for the reinvestment of dividends.

You also learn to love falling share prices because it allows your reinvested dividends to buy more shares – and with it – more income.

If this method of investing appeals to you, you can have a crack at building your own income portfolio. But before you do, you should take a look at 'The Dividend Letter' newsletter, written by my colleague, Stephen Bland. Stephen couldn’t care less about where the stock market is going – he just looks for good, income-producing stocks. He’s already built three ‘high-yield’ portfolios and will soon be starting on his fourth.

In a jittery, news-driven market like this one, this strikes me as the perfect way to invest and still sleep soundly at night. Take a look at his three-minute pub rant here, where he explains why so many investors lose money, and how you can avoid doing it.

• This article is taken from the free investment email Money Morning. Sign up to Money Morning here .

Our recommended articles for today

Should you buy Severn Trent’s index-linked bond?

Utility company Severn Trent is launching an inflation-linked bond for retail investors. Phil Oakley examines whether you should buy it, or stick with the company's shares.

How to make money while stealing business from the banks

Low interest rates for savers and tight credit for borrowers have given a huge boost to peer-to-peer lenders, which cut banks out of the lending process. So should you take the chance to play bank manager yourself? Matthew Partridge investigates.

Comments (24)

Share with
friends:

Comments

  • 1. AndyE

    (22 June 2012, 11:15AM)  Complain about this comment

    Another good way of getting diversification is to buy investment trusts. There is a good range to choose from these days which should satisfy most investing tastes.

  • 2. Stephen Lowe

    (22 June 2012, 11:39AM)  Complain about this comment

    Not arguing with the power of compounding, but the article completely misses the point to my way of thinking. The point is that dividends diversify your risk over time by NOT being reinvested back into the shares of the company that PAID them, but into OTHER investments. A randomised series of share price histories needs to be generated for the diversifying attractions of dividends to become evident. (So many higher dividend payers pay nice divis for years and years and then go belly up.!) The point is that you need to have reinvested those divis in something else. And that is really the point of companies PAYING divis out in the first place- they are distributing capital they can't reinvest as profitably in their business as investors can use it to invest in the market overall.

  • 3. Julian Guernsey

    (22 June 2012, 12:14PM)  Complain about this comment

    I agree with the article however I see an obivious flaw. You need to have the £80k to build a portfolio. It would take the average wage earner half his working career just to save that amount of cash. As you are aware the cost of buying shares with a couple of hundred pounds a month is not the most cost efficient way to go about things.

  • 4. Sunil

    (22 June 2012, 01:21PM)  Complain about this comment

    Agreed an optimum strategy is often to reinvest dividends into other investments, particularly as at any given the time the market will offer new and unique opportunities. The problem is you require a large portfolio to make this work. If you have, for example, a £10k portfolio with a yield of 4%, reinvesting a few hundred pounds isn't cost effective after commission, stamp duty etc. Hence re-investment can work better with collective investment vehicles rather than individual stocks.

  • 5. LERENARD

    (22 June 2012, 01:29PM)  Complain about this comment

    This method of saving for retirement when used with SIPPS is much more efficient and reliable than the traditional pension. And you get to pass on your 'pot' to your nearest and dearest instead of losing it all. This is a no brainer. Anybody still 'saving' with a pension fund is wasting their time and their money !

  • 6. Ovingite

    (22 June 2012, 01:49PM)  Complain about this comment

    I am a great fan of compound interest, but this article is misleading in that it ignores inflation. By my (very) rough and ready calculation, if we assume 3% pa inflation the year 20 income of £10.4K would have a real value (i.e. at NPV) of about £5.3K and the real yield drops to 6.6% rather than 13.1%.

    Now 6.6% is nothing to turn your nose up at, but its not the gold mine that the article infers. Of course if inflation is less than 3% happy days - but it could also be more and see a further erosion of net value.

    Lets keep it real please guys

  • 7. capondoug

    (22 June 2012, 02:23PM)  Complain about this comment

    I have to agree that the strategy ignores the impact of inflation: inflation, throughout history, doubles costs every 10 years; so £80k would need to grow to £320k in 20 years with gains only above £320k - so much for having £213.6k in 20years; and year 20 income of £10.44k is the equivalent of only £2.6k in today's money.
    I'll keep trying for capital gains, thanks.

  • 8. Tom O'Neill

    (22 June 2012, 02:23PM)  Complain about this comment

    I'm all in favour of the HYP approach, and use it myself (shares, ETFs, and ITs) but my immediate reaction (like Ovingite's) was that inflation would probably minimize any net return after twenty years.
    It is depressing that just buying some tiny, decrepit hovel in a decent London location would probably gain more long-term capital return than a policy of investing in thriving and deserving businesses. I know my own past return from property, though eroded by inflation, was still very high in real terms when I finally sold up.

  • 9. CarlJ

    (22 June 2012, 02:23PM)  Complain about this comment

    If compound positive interest is such a wonderful miracle then its mirror image, compound negative interest, must be correspondingly bad news. In these days of financial repression this is surely what potential savers should consider. £100,000 saved for 20 years at 2% would grow to £148,594. But suppose that interest rates are kept at Permanent Zero and that after tax and inflation (a.k.a. "the printing tax") your net return is _minus_ 2% p.a. In 20 years your savings will buy something that would today cost just £67,297. Faced with this prospect you might be thinking "I should just spend the money now." Well done: that's exactly what they want you to do.

  • 10. barry john

    (22 June 2012, 03:44PM)  Complain about this comment

    Carl J.

    Great comment!

  • 11. Ron hopeful

    (22 June 2012, 05:18PM)  Complain about this comment

    All fair comments but don't forget the example also assumes that the dividend amount will stay constant and of course there's an excellent chance that will increase at a faster rate than inflation.....so the example actually understates the likely return.

  • 12. Duh

    (22 June 2012, 10:02PM)  Complain about this comment

    Yet another biased article trying to deter individuals from investing in the fund industry. Why don't you ever look at reality: Inflation; gaining the £80k before 35; stamp duty; your time; reinvestment costs (any other charges by TD Investing...! etc.

    Also, cost yields?! Why would you take that seriously? You don't take your costs to be your current value.

    Overall, the costs in doing this "reinvestment" would erode the end figure so much you may as well pay your 0.5% AMC for a defensive income producing IT, or stuff it, a Global Investment grade corporate bond fund accumulation units with a 5% yield - same outcome, less risk.

  • 13. Carter

    (22 June 2012, 10:29PM)  Complain about this comment

    If you're going to cherry pick 15 of the best FTSE100 companies, why not stick the money in the iShares FTSE UK Dividend Plus ETF. It has a yield of 5.87% @ 0.4% costs and covers 50 from the FTSE.

  • 14. Steve

    (23 June 2012, 04:31PM)  Complain about this comment

    Looking iShares FTSE UK Dividend Plus ETF up on Trustnet.com, it is 30% in the financials sector which may be a concern in the current environment. I guess that it why the author is picking individual stocks rather than choosing a high yield tracker. That being said, there are other advantages to using a tracker instead.

  • 15. Boris MacDonut

    (23 June 2012, 09:17PM)  Complain about this comment

    A house bought in 1992 would have cost £60,000 and would now be worth £196,000. The rental stream over 20 years would have averaged £5,400pa and even ordinaries could do this with a modest mortgage and no need to have the cash spare up front.

  • 16. Julian

    (24 June 2012, 04:20PM)  Complain about this comment

    Yes, I agree. However, the stock selection is everything so PLEASE can we have the individual stock names.

  • 17. NickG

    (25 June 2012, 05:30PM)  Complain about this comment

    You misunderstand Julian:
    the purpose of this article is to make you click on a link and then subscribe to obtain high yield share tipping advice.

    That's why there are no share names

  • 18. Derek S

    (26 June 2012, 12:49PM)  Complain about this comment

    "the purpose of this article is to make you click on a link and then subscribe to obtain high yield share tipping advice"

    Yes, I totally agree. Having been wooed into subscribing to Moneyweek on the baisis of investment information I am consistantly frustrated by the ongoing "Heres half the story, now subscribe to another service of ours" Yes theres some good stuff on the website and in the weekly but to promote investing in Dividend funds and then withhold the info to subscribers is just not on. I'm reveiwing where I go from here with other subscription provideors.

  • 19. The Money Printer

    (26 June 2012, 01:58PM)  Complain about this comment

    Well, let's have some fun guessing: (from the top)
    1. Vodafone; 2. Sainsbury; 3. BAT (or Imp Tobacc0) either v good;
    4. ??no idea; 5. GSK; 6. ??too good to be true??; 7. ??Real estate -keep away??; 8. Reckitt Benckiser (good old reliable condoms and Harpic); 9. , 10, 11, no idea??; 12. Balfour Beatty, 13. Diageo; 14. Greggs; 15. Centrica; 16. Royal Dutch Shell

  • 20. Alberich

    (26 June 2012, 02:05PM)  Complain about this comment

    @The money printer; interesting, try this for size: (16 stocks defensive and high yeild)

    Vodafone, Shell, Nat Grid, Henderson Far East Income, GSK, As Zeneca, SSE, Drax, BAT, Imp Tobacco, Unilever, Tesco, 3i Infrastructure, HICL Infrastructure, Reckitt Benckiser, Severn Trent

    Solid, dependable from basic industries we need.

  • 21. andrewm

    (27 June 2012, 09:28AM)  Complain about this comment

    Does anybody know any brokers were you can automatically re-invest the dividends on a wider range of stocks than simply the FTSE 350?

  • 22. Graham Wadsworth

    (27 June 2012, 12:25PM)  Complain about this comment

    I think that a lot of the comments above are unfair. The projection assumes that the dividends and the share prices remain the same over 20 years. In actual fact, the dividends would tend to grow and as a consequence, so would the shares prices. So, in practice, the fund at the end of 20 years should be much higher than the projection. However, I agree with Stephen Lowe that the dividends should be invested in fresh dividend paying stocks. With regard to Money Week, it offers a lot of sound advice without having to subscribe to anything extra and I shall certainly be continuing with my subscription to it.

  • 23. nigel morris

    (27 June 2012, 01:07PM)  Complain about this comment

    I know I have done it. My best share is BATS FANTASTIC PERFORMANCE.

  • 24. Christopher

    (30 June 2012, 10:51AM)  Complain about this comment

    @15.
    Thanks Boris but past performance is no guide to future performance. Not a helpful post.

Leave a comment

This will be the name displayed with your comment.

This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.

Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.

captcha To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.

By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.


>