Gewinnerbranchen der Jahre 2006 bis 2040 (Seite 8028)

[investival]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 34.550.781 von Pontiuspilatus am 21.07.08 13:53:25

>> langfristig ist die währung irrelevant... <<
Stimmt.
Die Grafik in #13769 gibt darüber letztendlich keinen Aufschluss. Sie konstatiert "nur" eine outperformance internationaler Aktien seit 1982 - also ohne die zähen 70er sowie der EmMas ab 1989 - also auch noch ohne den 87er crash - vs. der Amis seit 1927 - also sogar noch incl. der greast depression.
Ergo hat diese Grafik bzgl. meiner vorlaut eingeworfenen Vermutung, die hiermit zurück genommen sei, praktisch keine Aussagekraft.

- Aber auf welches Jahr in der Zukunft beziehen sich denn diese KGVs?

[investival]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 34.550.814 von Pontiuspilatus am 21.07.08 13:56:43

Roche 'MUSS' gar nichts - #13780,

Im übrigen hätte ich nichts dagegen, meinte der fickerige Markt nun in Wiederholung zu NVS im letzten (Bear-Stearns-)Stimmungstief vorlaut, Roche würde sich so oder so übernehmen,

[investival]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 34.550.260 von Pontiuspilatus am 21.07.08 12:55:16

> The future looks brighter. Most consumer staples and utilities companies are able to raise prices to offset rising costs. As costs will eventually stabilize or go down, profit margins will expand. <
Nochmal 'eventually' ...

- Ich hoffe ja nicht, dass Du nach solchen hanebüchen-banal-undifferenziert-homebiasierten Meinungen investiert hast, ...

[investival]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 34.550.234 von Pontiuspilatus am 21.07.08 12:52:24

> ... they will recover eventually, and over the long term they might be good investments - we'll see. <
eventually ... may be ... we'll see ... -

Also, wenn schon hardcore turnarounds [warum eigentlich?], würde ich mir doch eher welche anschauen, wo ich halbwegs greifbare fundamentals habe - wie zB. bei einer GCI,

Irgendwann liegt man natürlich auch mit financials mal nicht mehr ganz daneben ... Wo ja jetzt die shortseller vom Markt genommen werden, *g* [finde ich übrigens gut]

[Pontiuspilatus]

wir scheinen mit unserer grundsätzlichen überlegung richtung medtech pharma usw jedenfalls richtig zu liegen

The new safe haven is...
...drugs? Biotechs, pharma companies and medical equipment firms have outperformed the broader market during the past few weeks. Here's why they may stay healthy.
EMAIL | PRINT | SHARE | RSS
By Paul R. La Monica, CNNMoney.com editor at large
Last Updated: July 18, 2008: 11:47 AM EDT
About the author



Bank of America profit tumbles 41%
Park your cash in a safe place
Economists see growth remaining feeble
Most banks are safe ... so is the FDIC
Getting a handle on stagflation
Issue #1 on CNN — This week, 12pm ET
Shares of Big Pharma firms and biotechs have rallied sharply in what has been a volatile month on Wall Street.


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Wall Street has been obsessing over financial stocks, sending the whole market on a wild ride.

But one sector has quietly avoided most of the turmoil: drugs. While many Big Pharma stocks have been poor performers this year, they've bounced back in the past few weeks.
Talkback: Are healthcare stocks a good bet in this market?

The Pharmaceutical HOLDRs, an exchange-traded fund that consists of 21 top drug stocks, is up more than 4%this month. And beaten down Big Pharma firms Abbott Laboratories (ABT, Fortune 500), Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMY, Fortune 500) and Schering-Plough (SGP, Fortune 500) have each gained about 10% so far during this wacky July.

By way of comparison, the S&P 500, even with the rally of the past two days, is still down 1.5% during the same period.

Biotechnology companies, not usually considered investments for the risk averse, have performed even better. The Biotech HOLDRs ETF is up nearly 8% this month. What's more, biotechs have been on fire all year, up 13% in 2008 while the Dow, S&P 500 and Nasdaq are all nursing losses of more than 10%.

And companies that make stents, pacemakers and other medical devices are also doing extremely well. Shares of three of the largest medical-equipment firms, St. Jude Medical (STJ), Boston Scientific (BSX, Fortune 500) and Baxter International (BAX, Fortune 500) are all up more than 15% this year.

Can drugs continue to be a safe haven during these volatile times?

For starters, healthcare stocks have typically been expected to hold up well during an economic slowdown - better than financials, tech and consumer stocks. So money may finally be starting to flow into this more defensive group.

"What all these stocks have in common is a relative lack of cyclicality. Drug stocks are relatively protected from a housing crisis and global economic slowdown," said Mark Bussard, an analyst with money manager T. Rowe Price Group.

Merger activity is also helping the drug sector.

Generic drug maker Teva Pharmaceutical (TEVA) announced this morning that it is buying rival Barr Pharmaceuticals (BARR) for nearly $7.5 billion, a 42% premium to where Barr's stock closed on Wednesday. Barr shares shot up more than 20% Thursday on speculation that a deal was imminent.

There have been other big deals in the industry this year, including ones where pharmaceutical companies have targeted biotechs. Japan's Takeda announced in April that it was buying biotech Millennium Pharmaceuticals for $8.8 billion, a 53% premium.

And more deals are likely as big drug firms increasingly face the risk of losing patent protection on some of their current blockbuster medications.

"Biotechs are in an interesting spot because large pharmas are interested in them to pump up their pipeline. All these companies are focused on getting new drugs into the marketplace and that's leading to more consolidation," said Kevin Hrusovsky, CEO of Caliper Life Sciences (CALP), a company that sells diagnostic technology tools to pharma firms and biotechs.

Earnings are also boosting the group. Johnson & Jonhson (JNJ, Fortune 500) reported an 8% increase in profits earlier this week, better than expected. St. Jude reported a more than 50% rise in profits.

And even many biotechs are generating strong earnings. Gone are the days when biotechs were perennial money-losers weighed down by heavy research and development costs.

Biotech Celgene (CELG), for example, one of the top performers in the S&P 500 this year, is expect to report a 35% percent increase in quarterly profits next week.

Hrusovsky added that he thinks even smaller biotechs should continue do well since many already have the cash they need to keep developing new drugs.

"Smaller biotechs seem to be fairly well funded. Many got funding in place prior to this recent round of liquidity concerns," he said.

T. Rowe Price's Bussard said almost all of the top drug, biotech and medical device firms do big business overseas as well. So a weak dollar is providing a lift to results. He adds that many of the stocks were beaten down earlier this year on concerns about growth.

Add all that up and you have a, dare I say it, prescription for more success, especially if the overall market remains turbulent.

"All of a sudden you have these stocks that looked pretty cheap, are benefiting from currency and are also actually showing growth, not a contraction in earnings," Bussard said. "This group looks pretty good compared to a bank, retailer or restaurant."

[Pontiuspilatus]

by the way dna notiert nun bei 95 $.

roche kann sich den günstigen kauf wohl abschminken.

die müssen mindestens 50 milliarden lockermachen.

[Pontiuspilatus]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 34.550.242 von investival am 21.07.08 12:53:11

Dass die US-Aktien schlechter abschneiden. liegt vielleicht an der langfristigen relativen Entwicklung des USD ...

wohl eher am betrachtungszeitpunkt. im januar 2000 wäre das ergebnis deutlich anders gewesen.

langfristig ist die währung irrelevant....

wenn man nun auf die marktsegmente setzt welche die outperformance der letzten jahre anführten und die underperformenden marktsegmente untergewichtet geht man meiner ansicht ein hohes risiko zukünftiger underperformance ein.


by the way

eby kgv 12,2
msft 10,7
csco 12,8
emc 13,5
sndk 10
ge 11,9
ko 14,9

langfristig sind das unabhängig von der derzeitigen börsenlage sehr interessante bewertungsrelationen insbesondere auch wenn man sie mit denen von vor ein paar jahren in relation setzt.
zudem dürfte erhöhe inflation über kur oder lang zu weiterhin eher schneller sinkenden bewertungen führen _unabhängig von einem vorübergehenden konjunkturellen durchhänger-

ich sag nur kaufen, kaufen, kaufen.

egal ob der markt nun ein durchschnitts kgv von 8 ansteuert oder nicht. die kurse sind inzwischen im größten bereich des marktes als extrem fair zu bezeichen

[Pontiuspilatus]

As Costs Rise, Consumer Staples and Utilities Should Outperform
posted on: July 07, 2008 | about stocks: BUD / DEO / ED / GIS / IDU / JNJ / K / KFT / KO / KXI / MO / PEP / PG / RAI / VDC / VPU / XLP / XLU
Font Size:
Print
Email

Consumer staples and utilities have been the stocks to buy in previous market downturns. Since they make or provide products we use daily (food, water, personal care, electricity, heat), their sales are not as correlated with economic cycles as, say, those of car manufacturers.

Six months ago, I looked at how some non-cyclical stocks -- Altria (MO), Anheuser Busch (BUD), Coca Cola (KO), Consolidated Edison (ED), Diageo (DEO), General Mills (GIS), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Kellog (K), Kraft (KFT), Pepsico (PEP), Proctor & Gamble (PG), and Reynold's American (RAI) -- performed during recent market slumps and since the beginning of the decade. I concluded that owning all these stocks, especially over the almost eight year period, was much better than owning the S&P 500, even excluding dividends.

Year to date all but two of the above stocks (BUD and General Mills) are down. (If not for InBev's buyout offer, BUD would probably be in negative territory as well.)

The reasons for most of these are not hard to see. Prices for food, raw materials, and energy are soaring. This constricts margins, and profits can (and in most cases do) take a hit even if sales remain steady or rise.

Consider Pepsi and Coke, for example. Most of their beverages come in plastic bottles and aluminum cans, and are sweetened by high fructose corn syrup. The cost of plastic, a petrochemical, has gone up with rising energy prices. Aluminum prices have risen sharply since the start of the year, making cans more expensive as well. Coke recently had to bail out a couple of its bottlers as a result. The rising price of corn affects high fructose corn syrup (and many of Pepsi's snack foods). Most of the other stocks mentioned above face similar issues.

Nevertheless, the majority of the above stocks (7 out of 12) are beating the S&P year to date. Moreover, out of the 12, only Coca Cola has underperformed the S&P since the start of the decade (if we exclude dividends).

We have a similar picture when looking at a broader array of non-cyclicals. Utilities can be purchased through ETFs XLU, IDU, and VPU. Consumer staples can be bought through KXI, XLP, and VDC. Note that KXI, the worst performer, is a global consumer staples ETF. Here's a year to date chart (click to enlarge):


Although in negative territory, they are all outperforming the S&P 500.

The future looks brighter. Most consumer staples and utilities companies are able to raise prices to offset rising costs. As costs will eventually stabilize or go down, profit margins will expand.

If share prices dip during the upcoming earnings season, it may be a good idea to do some research and pick up a few shares of the ETFs or of companies like Pepsi.


Disclosure: Although I do not directly own any of the stocks mentioned above, I may own some or all of them through BlackRock's Enhanced Equity Yield Fund

[investival]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 34.548.104 von Simonswald am 21.07.08 08:49:41

Interessantes market research,
Die Grafiken belegen eindrucksvoll, was für ein ASS-Depot angesagt ist: v a l u e
Und sie zeigen - entgegen Deiner Annahme - dass es nicht ganz egal ist, ob large oder small.
Dass die US-Aktien schlechter abschneiden. liegt vielleicht an der langfristigen relativen Entwicklung des USD ...

>> Reicht diese zusätzliche Dollarnachfrage im Zuge dieser Merger aus, um den Dollarkurs zu bewegen? <<
Über die psychologische Schiene könnte das mal was werden, werden US-Einkäufe nicht nur beim "Geiz-ist-geil"-Shopper ein richtiger Trend. Daraus könnte dann ein Herdentrieb werden, der von finanzstarken Firmen auf die Staatsfonds überschwappt, die ihre USD-Zinsanlagen kursschonend diversifizieren wollen, was (spätestens) dann wohl auf die Devisenfuzzis überspringt. Eine nachhaltige USD-Renaissance würde ich aber auch dann nicht unbedingt erwarten.

Der internationale Diversifikationsdruck hin zu sachwertorientierten Anlagen im Kontext mit jahrelanger Vernachlässigung zuvor überbewerteter US-largecaps ist mE. (Haupt-)Grund, large values wegen der langfristg besseren small values zumindest nicht unberücksichtigt zu lassen.

[Pontiuspilatus]

hier ein sehr interessanter artikel

Investing in Dividend Paying Companies
posted on: July 14, 2008 | about stocks: AA / AXPW.OB / BA / BS / C / CAT / CVX / CVY / DFT / DOW / DTD / DVY / EK / FDL / FL / GE / GM / GT / HD / HON / HPQ / IBM / IP / JNJ / JPM / KFT / KO / MCD / MMM / MO / MRK / MRO / MSFT / PFE / PFM / PG / PM / SHLD / T / UTX / VIA / VIA.B / VYM / VZ / WMT / X / XOM
Font Size:
Print
Email

Suppose 20 years ago, in the middle of the Savings and Loan Crisis, you decided to invest in a basket of dividend paying companies to hold for the long term. Not wanting to do too much research but still interested in buying quality companies, you decided to invest in those Dow Jones Industrial Average components that paid dividends at the time. You cashed the dividend checks, but left your portfolio alone. How would your investment have done until now (as of market close July 11, 2008)?

In July 1988, the 30 companies in the Dow were:

Allied-Signal Incorporated
Aluminum Company of America
Primerica
American Express Company (AXP)
AT&T (T)
Bethlehem Steel (BS)
Boeing Company (BA)
Chevron (CVX)
Coca-Cola (KO)
Du Pont
Eastman Kodak Company (EK)
Exxon Corporation (XOM)
General Electric (GE)
General Motors Corporation (GM)
Goodyear (GT)
International Business Machines (IBM)
International Paper Company (IP)
McDonald’s Corporation (MCD)
Merck & Company, Inc. (MRK)
Minnesota Mining & Mfg
Navistar International Corp. (NAV)
Philip Morris Companies (PM)
Procter & Gamble Company (PG)
Sears Roebuck & Company (SHLD)
Texaco Incorporated
Union Carbide
United Technologies Corporation (UTX)
USX Corporation
Westinghouse Electric
Woolworths

Bethlehem Steel, which went out of business in 2001, and Navistar did not pay dividends at the time, so let's say you bought the other 28 companies. Suppose you invested $100 in each (total investment of $2,800).

Here is some information about bit about some of the potentially unfamiliar names:
Allied-Signal is the predecessor of the diversified technology and manufacturing company we now know as Honeywell (HON). It was recently taken out of the DJIA. Today, the Aluminum Company of America is called Alcoa (AA).
Formerly American Can, Primerica once produced aluminum cans. It shifted its focus to finance in the late 1980s. Primerica became Traveler's Group, and later merged with Citicorp to become Citigroup (C). A record breaker at the time, the deal involved Traveler's paying $70 billion for Citi stock, creating the world's largest bank.
If you think you never heard of International Business Machines, you probably call it IBM. If Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing seems somewhat unfamiliar, that's because today it's called 3M (MMM).
Philip Morris, food and tobacco products maker, became Altria (MO), and has since spun off Kraft (KFT) and Philip Morris International. Altria was recently taken out of the DJIA along with Honeywell.
Texaco, an oil company, was bought by Chevron in 2001. Chevron was a DJIA component in 1988, was subsequently taken out, and is now back in. Union Carbide, maker of petrochemicals, was acquired by Dow Chemical (DOW) in 2001.
USX Corp spun off US Steel (X) and changed its name to Marathon Oil (MRO). Westinghouse Electric, a diversified business, became CBS in 1997 and was sold to Viacom (VIA VIA.B) in 1999.
Woolworths sold various consumer goods. After experiencing difficulties, it went by the name Venator for a short time, before adopting the name of its leading store, Foot Locker (FL).

So how did the portfolio do?

First, there are two sets of returns. One includes AT&T, and one does not. I found it a bit confusing, as to which was AT&T, and what the available financial data was actually referencing. Comedian Steven Colbert once expressed his own puzzlement. Here's a link to the video. (I don't know how long it'll work or whether the site has Viacom's permission to post it.)

Second, the results are understated. That is, actual results would have been better than the ones described below. I had trouble finding data on Sears, so for my purposes here, I'm assuming investing in it 20 years ago would have resulted in a total loss (this would not have happened had you actually invested in it).

I also had some trouble finding detailed data on the companies that were acquired (Texaco, Union Carbide, Westinghouse). To figure out their returns, I found the number of shares outstanding in 1988 for each of them by looking at their annual reports, and multiplied this number by their highest share price of the year, determining their highest 1988 market cap. Had you actually bought them in July 1988, you would almost certainly pay less than the price I assume here. Once I had the market cap, I found out how much the companies were purchased for, and determined the return from the difference.

From July 1, 1988 to July 11, 2008, the portfolio's return with AT&T is 430.34%. Without AT&T, the portfolio returned 421.94%. (The return without AT&T assumes that investing in AT&T in 1988 resulted in a total loss. That is, I'm still assuming that 28 stocks were purchased). Your $2,800 portfolio would today be worth almost $14,900 (over $14,600 without AT&T).

In light of the above, remember that actual returns would have been greater. In addition, these figures do not take into account the dividend payments you would have received over the two decades. Nor do they reflect the extra companies you would now own had you actually invested the $2,800 in 1988.

These returns of 430.34% (a little over 8.68% annually) and 421.94% (a little over 8.59% annually), while not earth shattering by any means, compare very favorably with the market's performance over the same period. From July 1988 to now, the S&P 500 has advanced 356.06% (around 7.86% annually).

However, you invested in dividend paying stocks, so how much would your investments be paying you today? With AT&T in the portfolio, you would receive $453.04 in dividends this year. That's over 16% of your original investment this year alone. If dividends remain steady, they will double your original investment around every four and a half years. Without AT&T, you'd get $436.61 this year.

The returns and dividends reflect both terrible performance by some stocks and great performance by others. The portfolio beat the S&P 500 because the winners greatly outpaced the losers. For example, while Goodyear, General Motors, and Woolworths have been lousy, GE, Philip Morris, and Procter & Gamble, to name a few, have been fantastic. On your original $100 investment in Philip Morris, for instance, you'd get over $72 in dividends this year alone (not counting Kraft or Philip Morris International, which also pay dividends). If Altria's dividend remains the same, you will more than double your original investment in Philip Morris every two years. As another example, as long as dividends remain steady, GE will pay you almost $40 on your original $100 investment every year from this point on.

There are a couple of morals that can be drawn from this story:
One is that you can be a lazy investor and still beat the market. A better moral is that great companies (here by virtue of their DJIA membership) that pay dividends can be market beating investments if you hold them for a long time. If you hold them long enough, the dividends alone on some might double your original investment every year.
Another lesson to draw is that diversification pays off. Picking only a few dividend stocks might have given you superior results, but you also could have picked a bunch of losers. By buying a basket of great companies (whatever your criteria for greatness might be, in this example it's DJIA membership), you shield yourself against some inevitable losses.

I don't know how long this blog will be around, but I'll start the same lazy portfolio with today's DJIA stocks. These days, there are several financials in the Dow, and who knows how much lower they'll go. On the other hand, they will recover eventually, and over the long term they might be good investments - we'll see. While right now it's pretty much the same as keeping track of the DJIA, the index's components will change in the future while the sample portfolio's holdings will remain the same.

Here are the current DJIA stocks (they all pay dividends) with their prices as of Friday's (7/11/2008) market close:

ALCOA INC. $34.64
AMER INTL GROUP INC. $23.08
AMER EXPRESS INC. $39.21
BOEING CO $63.28
BK OF AMERICA CP (BAC) $21.67
CITIGROUP INC. $16.19
CATERPILLAR INC. (CAT) $69.81
CHEVRON CORP $92.25
DU PONT E I DE NEM $41.47
WALT DISNEY-DISNEY C (DIS) $29.20
GEN ELECTRIC CO $27.66
GEN MOTORS $9.92
HOME DEPOT INC (HD) $21.58
HEWLETT PACKARD CO. (HPQ) $41.59
INTL BUSINESS MACH $122.12
INTEL CP $20.64
JOHNSON AND JOHNS DC (JNJ) $66.26
JP MORGAN CHASE CO (JPM) $33.16
COCA COLA CO THE $50.27
MCDONALDS CP $57.32
3M COMPANY $68.72
MERCK CO INC. $36.75
MICROSOFT CP (MSFT) $25.25
PFIZER INC. (PFE) $17.81
PROCTER GAMBLE CO. (PG) $63.45
AT&T INC. $32.58
UNITED TECH $60.69
VERIZON COMMUN (VZ) $34.92
WAL MART STORES (WMT) $56.29
EXXON MOBIL CP $85.48

I'll also track a few dividend ETFs (with prices as of market close on 7/11/08), as they also attempt to track the performance of great dividend paying companies.