What's the catch?
>>62075679>down 39.44% in the past five yearsgee anon idk
>>62075679All high dividend funds are subject to NAV erosion.
>>62075748Explain
>>62075770since youre retarded, basically nothing is getting much more than 10% long term. if it's paying more then that, at best it's returning capital, at worst youre bleeding slowly. the shills that shill nav eroding garbage will always gaslight tards "you gotta DRIP bro"
>>62075748but what if the NAV erosion is lower than the yield? thats good right
>>62075679What is the catch? The catch is the rug pull that bankrupts this fund and the asshole who made it runs off with your cash and you get nothing.
>>62076504> 10% dividend> somehow not a red flag> people becoming wholesale stupidkek
>>62076454How does 10% even outpace inflation let alone big gubmints cut? Maybe I’m a dumb zoomer but the pack of chicken legs has gone from $6 to $18 from when I first moved out in 2017.
that's horseshit and you'll lose to NAV depreciation as previously discussedif you're trying to do the dividend grind the absolute best case scenario is a covered call ETF (JEPI, JEPQ, SPYI) can return upto 12% but this also assumes a bull market. you will get axed if a bear market happensyou're best bet is something like 80% total market 20% CC ETF
>>62077726your best bet is to stop giving the jews running the ETFs your money actuallyreal ownership matters
>>62076641>How does 10% even outpace inflationdividends increase with inflation because companies just raise their prices and thus the amount of money they have to pay out accordingly
>>62076641that's not even talking yield either...that's total return. dividend funds that consistently grow the dividend and the nav usually pay less than 5%. when you start getting into covered call territory is where you get the erosion. examples of dividend funds that grow and don't erode are schd, dgro, vym. they only yield 2-4% but it's all qualified divs and they will average another 7+% nav growth on top of the dividend. the more conservative covered call funds like gpix, divo/qdvo split the difference more evenly where you're getting half your total return as yield and the other half as growth. with the goldman ones, it's more like they are trying to pay out as much as they can yield wise and still grow the nav 3% to keep up with inflation. when you get into neos and all the other shit, that's where you start getting trouble.
>>62075679where there's convolution there's corruption
