AlphaLite,
You are either twisting my words or you simply did not understand what I said. If you lack in reading comprehension, how do you expect to beat the market?
1) Did you or anyone else present evidence that Jason Fieber has beaten the S&P 500?
No they didn't.
The fact is that Jason Fieber has not beaten the market. This is the point I am making.
2) I never claimed that a very tiny minority cannot manage to beat the market using a dividend strategy ( whether by skill or through luck). The odds are so low, and the amount of work needed is so large, that it might not really be worth trying.
Perhaps you disagree with me and make up stuff because you lack basic reading comprehension. You should go back and read my comments, rather than stating things I have never said.
3) The other point I am making is that the quality of the companies Jason Fieber is selecting for the past three years has been lower relative to companies he was selecting earlier.
He used to pick aristocrats right? His most recent picks are just companies where he is just trying to pick at a bottom. He also seems to be picking the companies with the highest yields as of recently. This works until you average down on a company that really goes downhill
The other problem is that his early picks did well, but the amount of money he had invested with them was much lower than the amount of money invested with the newest picks. He simply had more money to invest in 2013, 2014 and 2015 than in 2011 and 2012.
After the blog became successful, he quality of picks and their performance seems to have decreased substantially.
Incidentally, a the largest portion of his funds have been invested in companies of poorer quality. When you pride yourself for responding to every comment on your site, you end up spending less time on the stock research.
4) The list of 26 companies is incomplete. This list was selected in 2005, and was most probably curve-fitted and optimized to show good backtested performance. I know for a fact that there were more than 26 companies that raised dividends by a quarter century in 1989. You can see by looking at the companies with longest streaks today like Cincinati Financial (55 years), or Genuine Parts (59 years) and ask yourself why these companies were not part of the list from 1989? What about Heinz or General Mills? Perhaps you suffer from survivorship bias? Or perhaps you are not as good in researching as you thought you were? Or perhaps basic math is tough for you. This is in addition to your lack of reading comprehension. Perhaps you should be indexing.
So the next time you respond, you have to refute all the 4 points above point by point. Otherwise you are not worthy of my time. (Funny how I spend less time on my investments than you and do better than 90% of investors out there and still know more about your own world of dividend investing than you)
After you have done that please provide evidence to me that shows that ( this is what I have been claiming all along.):
A) Jason Fieber has beaten the S&P 500 since 2011
B) That the time he spent picking stocks ( at least 5000 hours for 5 years) was worth it as a result.
C) If A is wrong and B is wrong, then the only reason he kept to his inferior ways of investing ( he probably did worse than your dividend aristocrats too) is because he earned money from the site
I have crunched the numbers myself and already have the answers ( which most dividend zealots refuce to acknowledge). Based on my observations, the only way that picking individual stocks worked for him is because he was paid in advertising income. Otherwise, he would have wasted his time.
