Investment Trust Dividends
I’ve booked a ‘profit’ with FGEN of £300.00.
Lots of posters post they have top sliced a position but this is where it gets technical.
Because the profit is deducted from all the shares held in the SNOWBALL, the actual booked profit after charges is £14.18. Although it provides £300 to re-invest in the SNOWBALL
The profit for FGEN is £484.88 and the unrealised profit is £462.36
A profit is not profit until the whole position is sold and the cash sits in your account.
Harvey Jones uses his own portfolio to show how a modest investment in Lloyds’ shares can compound over time through the power of passive income.
Posted by Harvey Jones
Published 22 May
You’re reading a free article with opinions that may differ from The Motley Fool’s Premium Investing Services.
Lloyds‘ (LSE: LLOY) shares have had a solid run. They’re up more than 22% in the last year, and 88.5% over five. I own the stock, so I’m happy.
In fact, I’m sitting on even bigger gains than that. How come?
The first reason’s luck. I invested £4,000 in 2023, just before the Lloyds’ share price really took off. With a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 6.5, and forward yield of 5.5%, I thought the FTSE 100 bank looked unmissable value.
Timing stock purchases is hit and miss, but I got that one dead right. My Self-Invested Personal Pension (SIPP0 tells me my shares have climbed 120% since I bought them at an average price of 45.3p. Today, they trade at around 100p.
The second reason I’m ahead is down to dividends, which don’t show up in the performance figures. Originally, I bought 9,259 Lloyds shares. I’ve received six dividends so far, and reinvested every single one. Today, I’m the proud owner of 10,240 shares and my total return’s 156%. That original £4k is now worth £10,225. Not a bad return in less than three years.
UK blue-chips boast some of the highest yields in the world. Over the longer run, as much as half the total return from FTSE 100 shares comes from reinvested dividends. Well-run companies aim to increase shareholder payouts every year, turbo-charging the overall compounding effect. Lately, Lloyds has increased its dividend by 15% a year.
On Tuesday (19 May) I received my seventh dividend. That was the second and final payout for the 2025 financial year, worth 2.43p per share. I got just over £248… a passive income that requires me to do pretty much nothing.
Once my SIPP reinvests that I’ll bag another 245 shares, or so. And remember, these are still early days.
With retirement 10 years away, there’s plenty more time my Lloyds shares to compound and grow. I’ll draw those dividends as income when I stop working.
So is today a good time to buy Lloyds shares? With a forward P/E ratio of 14.3, they’re pricier than when I bought them. The forward yield for 2026 is lower at 4.3%. But that’s forecast to hit 5.1% in 2027.
Even a solid bank like this one has risks. Remember the financial crisis? Also, Lloyds is very much a UK-focused operation, and our economy’s struggling today. That could hit demand for mortgages and increase loan impairments, hitting profits. After a strong run, the shares could easily slow, or even fall.
I still think Lloyds is well worth considering today as part of a balanced portfolio of FTSE 100 stocks. Investors shouldn’t wait too long for the perfect moment to buy. Timing stock purchases is almost impossible. I got lucky here, but I’ve been unlucky too.
In my view, the sooner investors take advantage of the long-term compounding effect, the better.
The SNOWBALL currently has cash of £1,138 and at the end of next week, cash for re-investment will be 2k.
The SNOWBALL is most probably going to build a position in the previous holding of RECI.
Dividends whilst fairly secure are flat.
MONTHLY UPDATE
As at 30 April 2026, the Company was invested in a diversified portfolio of 26 investments with a valuation of £282.1m.
The Company’s available cash was £13.6m, net effective leverage was 31.5% and it has £8.1m invested in Cash Equivalents (MMF).
Current yield 10% and trades discount to NAV of 16%, which is likely to grow wider, so a trade only for the dividend.
Rida Morwa
Investing Group Leader
Co-authored with Hidden Opportunities
The best things are often the least obvious and sometimes less known or less advertised.
I recently visited Toronto and went to Añejo Restaurant in Downtown. The reason for the choice of restaurant was that my wife was craving Tres Leches, and this was the only place nearby that featured it on the menu, according to Google. Google also seemed to tell us that Añejo is a popular spot, known for its lively atmosphere, drink selection, and tacos. During my visit, I got the sense that this is the kind of place you’d visit if you were looking for a fun night out. We were there only for a specific dessert; we had already finished our dinner elsewhere.
Now, Añejo’s Tres Leches is different. On the physical menu, it said “lemon cake”, “dulce de leche,” and “candied lemon,” and I told my wife, “This may not be what she was craving,” but she agreed to give it a try.
We received a slightly unconventional take on the popular Latin American dessert, but it was much better than the original. It was not flashy or heavily promoted and certainly not the reason most people walk through the door (in fact, the waitress appeared a bit disappointed when we only ordered two of these desserts and did not go with anything on their popular drinks menu). Yet, it ended up being extremely delicious and easily became the most memorable part of our trip.
That’s often how it works. The things that deliver the best value aren’t always the ones that get the most attention. They sit quietly in the background, overlooked, underestimated, and underappreciated. Investing is no different.
While headlines chase the loudest names and the most talked-about opportunities, some of the best income-generating investments remain largely unnoticed, quietly doing their job, quarter after quarter.
Today, we’re going to look at two such opportunities.
Readers often ask how large our portfolio is since we discuss some ideas every day. Portfolio management is an art; it requires careful analysis not only at the time of buying but also periodic updates based on business performance. This due diligence is reserved for members of High Dividend Opportunities, and as such, we don’t normally share our Buys and Sells.
Kilroy Realty Corporation (KRC) is one such company we have never publicly discussed but have covered several times within HDO since our purchase a couple of months ago. KRC is an internally managed REIT that develops, acquires, and manages office, life science, and mixed-use property types in Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, Seattle, and Austin. KRC is the 46th largest property REIT in the United States by market cap, with a portfolio of 123 buildings, leased to 438 tenants, and a portfolio occupancy of 77.6% as of March 31, 2026. In addition, KRC also has 608 residential units in San Diego, with an occupancy of 95% as of March 31, 2026. KRC stock is up ~15% since we began buying, and this equity REIT has a lot more to deliver as we look ahead.
During Q1, KRC reported record leasing activity, totaling 568K sq. ft. About 40K sq. ft. of the leases were on previously vacant properties, while 80K sq. ft. was new leasing on occupied spaces. Leases for 82K sq. ft. were renewed.
During the quarter, KRC sold $350 million in non-core properties, and management noted having used the proceeds from asset disposition towards debt repayments and share repurchases. In April, KRC repaid the $50 million of its 4.300% Private Placement Senior Notes Series A due July 2026, at par. During the quarter, the REIT purchased 2.4 million shares of common stock for $72.7 million.
In February 2026, KRC entered into a Joint Venture, by acquiring a 97% ownership interest in a land site in Downtown Redwood City, supporting a 251K sq. ft. office building. Construction will commence in 2027 and will cost $330 to $350 million, and the project is 58% pre-leased via a 20-year lease with a leading global law firm—Cooley LLP—for 145K sq. ft. Management expects delivery to be in 2030.
Q1 2026 revenues were relatively flat YoY at $270.1 million, while FFO (Funds From Operation) dropped to $108.8 million ($0.91/share). As originally guided, KRC’s net occupancy levels and FFO will be lower in 2026 due to KOP2 (Kilroy Oyster Point Phase 2) being added to its square footage, largely unoccupied but incurring costs. Excluding the new development at KOP2, the REIT’s occupancy was 81.5% with 84.3% leasing as of March 31, 2026. Management shared their upgraded guidance for 2026, expecting FFO between $3.49 and $3.63 (from the previous range of $3.25 to $3.45). This places KRC’s $2.16 annual dividend at a modest 60% payout ratio.
KRC continues to invest in high-quality assets, and as these developments move through the buildout phase, we are seeing a temporary YoY dip in operating metrics. This is part of the value creation process, not a sign of deterioration. Meanwhile, investors are paid to wait. The dividend remains well-covered and steady, allowing us to collect steady income while today’s capital investments position the company for future FFO growth.
In our February article on Western Midstream Partners, LP (WES), we noted that management was eyeing accretive acquisitions as part of its capital allocation in 2026.
WES’ capital allocation plans also indicate potential pursuit of accretive acquisitions in 2026, similar to the Aris transaction, for inorganic growth and asset expansion. – HDO, February 27, 2026
We didn’t have to wait too long to find out more. On May 6, WES announced the agreement to acquire Brazos Delaware II for $1.6 billion. Brazos Delaware is one of the largest privately held gathering and processing platforms in the Texas-Delaware Basin. It owns and operates ~900 miles of pipeline and 460 Mcf/d natural gas processing capacity. The transaction will involve $800 million in cash and $800 million in stock and is expected to close towards the end of Q2 2026. In 2025, WES generated ~62% of its Adj. EBITDA through its operations in the Delaware Basin. Source
This proportion is expected to rise after the Brazos transaction closes, supplemented by the completion of the Pathfinder Pipeline and North Loving II in 2027. We will note that Brazos comes with long-term contracts with a weighted-average life of over 9 years and with its top seven customers (leading energy names in the U.S. like ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil, Diamondback Energy, etc., accounting for ~80% of total volumes).
WES has been one of our strongest performers since we added it to the HDO model portfolio in December 2023. The partnership delivered three distribution raises and market-beating total returns through our ownership, and there is a lot more of it as we look ahead.
During Q1, WES generated a record Adj. EBITDA of $683.1 million, a 15% YoY increase, as a result of a full-quarter contribution from the Aris acquisition. Higher commodity prices towards the end of Q1 and a 7% reduction in operation and maintenance expenses provided further tailwinds. WES reported record crude oil (4% YoY) and NGL (6% YoY) throughput in the Delaware Basin, while produced water throughput reached 2,795 MBbls/d (a 140% YoY increase primarily driven by the full quarter contribution from the Aris acquisition).
From a balance sheet standpoint, WES paid down $440.5 million of senior notes due 2026 with proceeds from the senior notes issued in the fourth quarter of 2025 ($600 million of senior notes due 2031). The company ended Q1 with liquidity of over $2.6 billion and maintains an investment-grade BBB- balance sheet.
WES management has raised its 2026 guidance and expects Adj. EBITDA between $2.50 billion and $2.70 billion and Distributable Cash Flow between $1.85 billion and $2.05 billion, while affirming its CapEx between $850.0 million and $1.00 billion.
Last month, we predicted that WES would raise its distribution soon to $0.93/share, and they did. The partnership recently issued a 2.2% increase to its quarterly distribution to exactly $0.93/share, representing a forward yield of 8.2%. WES is growing organically and inorganically and continues to fully fund its pursuits, in addition to paying a growing distribution to shareholders. The stock offers an 8.6% yield and continues to present an excellent opportunity for income investors.
The most memorable experiences often come from the least expected places. Similarly, some of the best income opportunities are likely the ones quietly operating outside the spotlight.
Wall Street often focuses on what is exciting and trendy. Income investors, however, are paid to focus on what works, quietly. Our two picks discussed in this article, KRC and WES, will never dominate headlines, but both continue to quietly generate steady cash flow and reliable income. This is how we build wealth at High Dividend Opportunities, quietly, one dividend at a time.
The Oak Bloke
May 20
Regional REIT LON:RGL was a reader voted idea to be included in the OB picks for 26. Has the wisdom of crowds proved to be a folly?
Far from it. RGL’s portfolio graded EPC B grew from 60% to 61.1% in 1Q26. An “A rated” or “B rated” property is important to save money but also necessary by 2030 under MEES is Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard regulations which forces UK landlords to meet EPC standards. In any case more and more businesses and organisations are facing pressure to reduce CO2 under Mandatory Carbon Reduction Plans (CRPs) as part of public sector bids and tenders – but also from their customers registered with ISO14001. Part of ISO14001 is to audit your supply chain and this is beginning to drive compliance.
Charities are also facing growing scrutiny to their ESG under new SORP 2026 rules which mean they need to focus on reduction to impact and ESG reporting in their Charity Accounts. Leasing an office that is EPC C, D or E means higher operational costs and headaches, which is driving demand towards the A and B properties.
RGL tell us the market for these is tight. Tight means better rentals per Sq.Foot and higher occupancy. It’s not just RGL who tell us. The British Property Federation also tell us only 17% of commercial properties meet this criteria, meaning RGL is well placed to serve this growing segment of the market.
The latest RICs survey 1Q26 tells us office demand is rising and availability falling.
Demand of about 2m square feet per annum meets supply of less than a third of that in the 2026-2028 period where build times are extended and complicated through new legislation like the Building Safety Act. Rising rates will do nothing to improve the appetite to increase office supply or to carry out improvements to achieve EPC A or B.
RGL’s LTV shrank to 39.4% from 40.4% through a further £12.6m of sales proceeds which reduced the portfolio by £12.1m.
That’s £0.5m above book. That’s like selling something worth 100p for 104p when you can buy it for 45p (today’s share price). 45p? Yes because RGL is at a 54.6% discount (or estimated 54.8% at 1Q26) that’s how much you’re paying.
Technically the actual numbers are roughly double the “in the pound” example above. That is to say you pay 90p per RGL share to get 335p of Offices with an estimated -137p of debt net of all other assets to arrive at 198p of Offices.
I’ve set it out below:
If we consider what those offices generated in 2025….. Here’s the Cash Flow.
In per share terms RGL generated 7.4p of Rental Cash net of interest charges, and a further 30p of cash from selling off properties it didn’t want minus -8p spent to do up properties it wanted to keep.
But think about it. 29.3p of net cash gen. From a share you can buy for 90p.
You’d not see this interpretation from broker guesses. They don’t provide free cash flow guesses and they forecast stagnant and pitifully poor returns for the next three years, of low single digit profit growth.
Nothing to see here.
The near complete absence of competitive supply and rising demand for EPC A and B will do nothing to improve RGL’s fortunes – apparently. I think that view is deeply incorrect.
At face value the rent roll in 1Q26 can look less impressive too dropping £0.6m to £49.8m. But it’s likely, given the movement in occupancy and portfolio size that the “Core” element rentals grew in 1Q26 and now make up the lion share of the rent roll.
Here are the estimates and the 11.1% rental income growth in CORE properties (in 3 months!).
As unwanted properties get disposed and as net lettings to the Core category are carried out the Rent Roll actually improved.
How? As a proportion of the ERV it grew from 65.5% to 66.4% in 1Q26.
Once again we see strong evidence that the CORE market is tight when RGL are achieving 9.8% above the estimated rental value (ERV). £1.1m of new income in one quarter is £4.4m annualised. 26 tenants is nearly half of the 64 new tenants added in the whole of 2025.
We see a clear trend of improvement over time too. While we see a declining morass of numbers where the rent roll has declined from £72m to £50m since 2021 and ERV from £96.2m to just £75m we need to bear in mind a couple of key points.
Property Rents are rising in 2024-2025. Per property the ERV is heading upwards, even if we don’t see the benefit of that yet.
Rent and ERV per Property
Per unit see the same with tentative signs of improvement in the latest results.
Similarly per tenants, some improvement per tenant but largely flat over four years.
If you compare annual reports the same conclusion can be drawn by comparing the equivalent yield (the return based on occupancy data) and the reversionary yield (the anticipated yield assuming occupancy is 100%).
Rent per £1 of RGL
What these “flat” numbers don’t really convey is the value in 1Q26 versus prior years.
Today the buy price is 90p versus a 500p+ price in 2021, or 168p in 2023.
In other words the rent per property, unit and tenant per £1 invested is hugely higher today compared with prior years. 600% higher. Some of that comparison is through share dilution back in 2024 halving the ownership, and some is due to the level of leverage in 2021 too.
Conclusion
With continued progress of £12.6m disposals + £2.5m post period and a continued focus on capex improvement too, the portfolio continues to grind inexorably towards improvement. Selling properties tha were 10% occupied at close to book value.
With a backdrop of rising rates this represents both opportunity and threat to RGL. The opportunity is a tightening market for real assets, where building more will likely be difficult under a high rates environment. This benefits the incumbents including RGL. With fixed/swapped/capped debt and a continued deleveraging and asset improvement programme RGL appears to be well placed in the UK regions.
Post period a further £0.9m of rental income adds to the £1.1m achieved in 1Q26.
I continue to believe – and the evidence shows – RGL is well positioned in the market and probably at a low point so despite a weak share price this is – in my opinion – an owner of interesting and increasingly valuable assets.
Regards
The Oak Bloke
Disclaimers:
This is not advice – you make your own investment decisions.
Micro cap and Nano cap holdings including REITs might have a higher risk and higher volatility than companies that are traditionally defined as “blue chip”.
Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Brett Owens, Chief Investment Strategist
Updated: May 20, 2026
Two dividend cuts in the last two quarters, and we are buying.
Wait. What?
When do we ever chase one dividend cut, let alone two? Let me tell you when, my fellow contrarian!
A Terrible Divvie Trend and We’re In?
Let’s start with the fantastic yield. At 15.3%, FS KKR Capital Corp (FSK) has our attention. That doesn’t mean buy—we don’t chase headline yields around here without doing our homework. But in this case, management is redirecting the money saved from these cuts into share buybacks.
Which means we’ll likely see price appreciation as shares move closer to fair value. Plus, fewer shares outstanding make it easier for management to cover that fat dividend.
Right now, the rubber band is stretched wide on the pessimism surrounding FSK. Shares trade for just 58 cents on the dollar. Translation: in healthy markets, FSK trades closer to book value—a dollar of loans for a dollar of stock. (Which is 75% up from here.)
What is FSK? A business development company (BDC), a publicly traded fund that lends to small and mid-sized American businesses. It’s run by KKR, one of the most respected private credit shops on the planet.
The management team at KKR just put up $600 million in cash and committed capital to defend their beaten-up dividend stock. Their ante has our attention despite the disastrous headlines.
Now, what happened at FSK in the first place? Why is it so beaten up?
Well, BDCs as a group have been taken to the woodshed this year. The middle-market companies they lend to are under pressure, struggling to service their debt at higher rates. That credit pain flows straight through to the BDCs that fund them.
Historically, BDCs have lived in the safer corner of credit. They lend senior-secured to private American businesses and collect their interest payments like clockwork. Basically, they’re annuities… boring, predictable, yield-y.
But now the entire BDC universe is wrestling with the same headwinds. Credit spreads are widening and non-accruals (delinquent debtors!) are creeping higher across the sector. The clockwork annuity isn’t ticking.
FSK inherited a chunk of legacy investments from prior mergers, and management has spent the last several quarters writing them down. Net asset value (NAV), the per-share value of FSK’s loan portfolio, dropped from $20.89 to $18.83 in just the first quarter of 2026. Non-accruals (loans not paying interest) climbed for the third straight quarter to 4.2% of the portfolio.
In their May 11 statement, FSK’s top execs admitted “certain new non-accrual assets” continue to surface. Translation: more credit pain on the way.
That’s the bad news. The good news? This storm is all priced into the stock, and then some.
At 58 cents on the dollar, KKR sees value. So, last week, the management team announced four actions to close that discount window. Backing it up with a $600 million investment.
First, a KKR subsidiary will buy $150 million of FSK preferred stock, convertible into common shares at the current NAV price of $18.83. Yup, KKR is putting its own capital into FSK at a conversion price 75% above today’s stock price. This is a big bet that FSK trades back toward book value.
Second, a KKR subsidiary will tender for $150 million of FSK common stock at $11.00 per share. KKR is buying shares directly at a price the company’s leadership publicly states is below intrinsic value but slightly above where it trades today, just under $11. (Saying hey, there is serious value here!)
Third, FSK itself just authorized a $300 million share repurchase program running through June 2027. With FSK trading under $11, that retires roughly 10% of total shares outstanding. Every share repurchased below book accretes NAV for remaining holders, makes the dividend easier to pay (fewer shares!). This math compounds, too.
Fourth, KKR waives half of its subordinated income incentive fee for four straight quarters. You read right: KKR skips its own compensation to support FSK’s net investment income and by extension, the dividend. An admission that hey we kinda stunk, so we’re taking a pay cut. Management falls on its sword.
Add it up and we have $600 million of fresh KKR capital flowing into a $3 billion market cap—a 20% “booster shot”:
This is simply unique. I can’t recall a sponsor putting up this level of capital and structural support to a single fund simultaneously.
I realize the FSK rearview mirror is ugly. But the math from here is forgiving. From 58 cents on the dollar to 70 cents, a 21% price move (to the $13.30 neighborhood). Add the 15.3% yield we collect over the next year and we’re looking at a 36% total potential return on a partial mean reversion:
Caution: This is a trade, not a buy-and-hold! We’re not wedding ourselves to FSK.
We’re simply stepping in and drafting KKR’s $600 million “whale bet” on FSK shares. As the gap between the stock and fair value closes, we’ll collect payouts—and, sooner rather than later, cash in our chips.
Brett Owens, Chief Investment Strategist
Updated: May 19, 2026
Last week’s hot inflation reports have handed us a timely “two-step” 10.3% dividend opportunity. We’re going to jump on it today.
Here’s our plan:
I know, I know. How can I be talking about falling rates at a time like this?
The Strait of Hormuz is closed. Oil is at $100. And last week saw two hot inflation reports: CPI hit 3.8% in April, and the PPI (producer price index) soared 6%.
I’ll get to that in a second, but let’s start with Step 1: that 10.3% average yield. It comes from two closed-end funds (CEFs) that have seen their discounts to NAV drop to, frankly, ridiculously low levels.
One is a 9.3% payer trading for 10.8% below NAV (or the value of its portfolio). The other is a 12%-paying bond fund whose price falls when rates (and rate fears) rise. But—and it’s a critical “but”—this fund’s yield rises at the same time.
Irrational worries have both funds at “peak yield” right now. We want to lock those in before rates fall. Which brings us to Step 2.
AI Enters the Chat
In the longer run, rates will fall.
For one, this war will eventually end. Neither country can afford to have it drag on. An agreement will reduce inflation. And we can be sure new Fed chair Kevin Warsh will push for rate cuts the first chance he gets.
This is just the opening act in the rate story, though. AI is the headliner.
We haven’t been talking about it as much these days, but the robots are taking jobs: According to research by Goldman Sachs (GS), AI is eliminating roughly 16,000 jobs a month. As that continues, it’ll weigh on inflation.
Wage growth is sagging, too.
In April, it was 3.6%, below the 3.8% CPI print. When price gains outrun wage gains, consumers cut back, putting more downward pressure on inflation. The cure for high prices is high prices!
Funny thing is, little of this has registered with investors. Which makes now the time to lock in our 10.3% payout, before they wake up to the facts here. Let’s start with …
CEF #1: 12.0% Payouts From a Manager With “Swagger”
The DoubleLine Income Solutions Fund (DSL) is a holding of my Contrarian Income Report service (and a fund I bring up often in these columns). It trades at a 4.5% discount to NAV as I write this—a level we haven’t seen this consistently since late 2022, when inflation hit 8%!
DSL’s Discount Goes Back to 2022 …
That’s ridiculous for a fund run by the “Bond God,” Jeffrey Gundlach, who’s got a wide mandate to scour the credit market. The discount’s pullback has also pushed the yield up to that sweet 12%.
… Sending Its Dividend Yield North of 12%
DSL also pays monthly, and held its payout steady through the 2022 dumpster fire (a year Gundlach capped with a special dividend—talk about swagger!)
The Bond God’s Steady Payout
Source: Income Calendar
This one is a textbook contrarian play on the herd’s inflation panic. We’re happy to take the other side of the argument, especially with dividends and discounts as high as these.
CEF #2: A 9.3% Pharma Payout AI Is Coming For (in a Good Way)
The 9.3%-paying BlackRock Health Sciences Term Trust (BMEZ) sports a discount in the “sweet spot”—down in the last year (thanks to tariffs and RFK Jr.), but on the mend now.
BMEZ’s “Discount Rebound” Gets Rolling
We can thank AI for our opportunity here. As we’ve written before, the tech is set to slash drug-development times, adding billions of sales for drug stocks like BMEZ holdings Merck & Co. (MRK), Moderna (MRNA) and Gilead Sciences (GILD).
That’s not priced into BMEZ, with its 10.8% discount well below its year-ago figure of 3.5%. Management did cut the payout last fall—another reason why BMEZ is in the doghouse.
But that cut shifted the payout from a floating rate to a fixed $0.11 a share monthly. And the fund still offered a high 9.3% yield after the cut—same as today. BMEZ traded at a roughly 11% discount then, too.
In other words, we’re paying the same as we would’ve right after the cut for a safer, more predictable payout. And again, AI’s impact on drug development isn’t fully priced in. That makes now the time to buy.
With BMEZ and DSL, we’ve got a 10.3% average yield, with dividends paid monthly. That’s a big help in offsetting inflation in our day-to-day lives. Plus, their wide discounts line us up for upside as rates fall and AI productivity gains kick in.
Now let’s make another move for even more peace of mind: We’ll map out our payouts well into the future, so we know exactly how much we’re getting and when—down to the day (and the penny).
Buy DSL and BMEZ, Then Drop Them Into This Unique “Dividend Predictor”
If there’s one thing we dividend investors know well, it’s the value of a high, steady income stream in stressful times like these.
This is where our Income Calendar dividend-tracking tool comes in. It lets us clearly see our income stream, month in and month out, with a level of detail you won’t find anywhere else.
Best part is, it’s integrated with Plaid, so it can safely and securely link to your brokerage account with no inputting on your end. (When we rolled this feature out, I linked it to my Schwab account with just a few clicks.)
The upshot? Income Calendar lets you quickly and easily ensure your dividends are in your account before your bills come out.
Let’s walk through it with monthly paying BMEZ and DSL, then toss in two other holdings from Contrarian Income Report that pay quarterly, to add some variability to our income stream.
Those would be pipeline operator Antero Midstream (AM), which benefits as the Iran conflict squeezes global LNG supplies—and Dominion Energy (D), which feeds AI’s bottomless power demand.
Let’s invest an imaginary $100,000 in each. Income Calendar tells us, in seconds, what we can expect in dividends every month from our 4-buy “mini-portfolio”:
That’s a sweet setup, with our two monthly payers giving us a solid base and our two quarterly payers juicing our income every second and third month.
This mix still gives us fairly consistent income, ranging from $1,781 to $2,843 a month. The total comes to $29,755 on the year, for a 7.4% yield. (Note that IC doesn’t project dividend growth, just to be conservative, so our real payouts could be even higher.)
The under-performing Murray Income Trust has appointed the team behind the high-flying Artemis Income Fund to turn its fortunes around. Can they succeed?
By Rupert Hargreaves
Share
At the end of last year, Murray Income Trust (LSE: MUT) announced it had decided to drop Aberdeen as its investment manager and replace it with the team behind the top-performing Artemis Income Fund. The change was desperately needed.
The shares delivered a total return of just 26.9% over the five years to 19 November 2025, putting Murray Income firmly at the bottom of the UK equity income investment trusts sector rankings. Over the same period, the FTSE All-Share index returned 70.9%. Meanwhile, the Artemis Income Fund, managed by Andy Marsh, Nick Shenton and Adrian Frost, has outperformed the UK equity-income fund sector by around 1.70 percentage points per year over the past ten years.
The growth of this fund – which now has assets of around £5.3 billion – has been fundamental to Artemis’s success. At the end of the first quarter, the boutique reported approximately £41 billion in assets under management, up from just £28.5 billion at the end of 2024.
Stay ahead of the curve with MoneyWeek magazine and enjoy the latest financial news and expert analysis, plus 58% off after your trial.
Murray Income has now become the second trust mandate that Artemis has won. It also took over the Invesco Perpetual UK Smaller Companies Investment Trust – renamed Artemis UK Future Leaders – in 2025.
The Artemis team officially took over the Murray Income portfolio at the beginning of March. They swiftly restructured all of the trust’s holdings to mirror Artemis Income’s portfolio.
At the end of 2025, Murray’s top-five holdings were AstraZeneca, National Grid, Unilever, RELX and TotalEnergies, which together accounted for 21.6% of the portfolio. These have now been replaced by Tesco, GSK, Lloyds Bank, NatWest and Aviva, which make up a similar 23.6% of the total.
The key difference between the new Artemis approach and the former Aberdeen strategy is a focus on cash flow rather than yield. The team uses free cash flow to assess how much cash a company generates and whether its dividend is sustainable. They concentrate on companies that they believe have the best potential for free cash-flow generation, overall shareholder yield (they like companies that can buy back stock as well) and long-term growth.
Comparing the old and new portfolios illustrates the difference in approach. The new portfolio is trading at a free cash flow yield approximately 50% higher than the old portfolio, based on Morningstar’s data.
The top-five holdings in the Artemis portfolio also yield around 1.7 percentage points more on average compared with the Aberdeen portfolio. All in all, the new holdings are cheaper, generate more cash and offer a better overall shareholder yield. That should help the trust maintain its 52-year record of dividend growth, which has earned it “Dividend Hero” status from the Association of Investment Companies (AIC).
While Marsh, Shenton and Frost are new to Murray, they are not new to income investing. If their record at Artemis Income is anything to go by, the trust has an exciting future.
Investors who already back their existing open-ended fund may want to consider which vehicle is likely to offer the best returns. Recent research from the AIC found that a solid majority (77%) of investment trusts have outperformed open-ended funds run by the same manager over ten years, with average excess returns of 1.3 percentage points per year.
The new managers are already capitalising on a key difference between investment trusts and open-end funds by deploying leverage to enhance returns. The trust has a leverage targeting of 8%-10%, and borrowings stood at by the end of March.
At a 7% discount to net asset value (NAV) and yielding 4.3% (versus its open-ended peer’s 3.5%), Murray Income now offers cheap exposure to a sector-leading strategy.
OR
To maintain a blended yield of 7%, it would have to be pair traded with a higher yielder.
Covered Calls, Dividend Investing, ETFs, High-Yield Investing, Income Investing, Passive Income
May 20, 2026 by Tim Plaehn
Two years (and a few months) ago, we launched our ETF Income Edge service to help investors profitably invest in the rapidly growing world of option strategy, high-yield ETFs sporting yields like 15%, 25%, even 40% or more.
The challenge with these ETFs is managing them to turn those great yields into realized total returns. Investors need to understand that the underlying assets will go up and down. Also, an overly aggressive option strategy can lead to net asset value (NAV) erosion, which can have a significant negative effect on total returns.
When I select ETFs for the ETF Income Edge portfolio, I focus on NAV stability. New ETFs hit the market every week, so I regularly compare returns between ETFs and their underlying assets. I focus on having a diversified portfolio based on those underlying assets.
To help manage a portfolio of these funds, I have developed a specific position management strategy. I have been using the strategy in my own ETF Income Edge tracking brokerage account, and I am very happy with the results.
The core of the strategy is to manage the ETFs to maintain a stable, dollar-weighted position size. If an ETF share price increases above a certain level, we sell shares, locking in a profit. If the price falls, we purchase shares, buying more while they’re “on sale.”
Share trade results going into or from a cash balance in the account. Dividends earned go into the cash balance. If you set up an account using this strategy, it’s good to have some capital in a cash balance.
Here is a simple example:
You start with $5,000 each in 10 high-yield ETFs, for a total commitment of $50,000. With this amount, I suggest having a few thousand dollars in the cash balance.
The goal is to keep each ETF close to a $5,000 value. I recommend checking the current values a couple of times a week. If a position is more than 5% ($250 in this case) above or below the target amount, you buy or sell shares to bring the position’s value back to the target.
Over time, the returns you earn show up as changes in the cash balance. Remember that dividends earned (which happen every day with the ETF Income Edge portfolio) also go into the cash balance.
Here is my experience so far this year. As most asset types declined over the first three months, I saw my cash balance slowly decline, while I was buying shares to maintain position values, offset by dividends coming in. Then, in April, markets turned around and moved strongly higher over the month. During that period, I was selling shares and earning dividends into the cash balance. My cash balance, and thus the return on the account, is significantly higher than it was at the start of the year. From my experience, this somewhat unique portfolio strategy works.
Let’s close out with a new ETF to check out. The Nicholas Nuclear Income ETF (NUKX) is managed to deliver a 12% yield and is the latest addition to the ETF Income Edge portfolio.
From my experience, this somewhat unique portfolio strategy works.
Tim Phaelen
Income yield this year around 13%, maybe less next year, or more ?
The stock market has always been a symbol of opportunity — a place where fortunes can rise and fall in an instant. For nearly a century, investors around the world have watched markets boom with optimism and collapse under the weight of fear, greed, and uncertainty. From the catastrophic crash of 1929 that triggered the Great Depression to the modern-day turmoil of 2020’s pandemic-driven selloff, each major market crash tells a story — not just of financial loss, but of human emotion, innovation, and resilience.
Understanding these crashes isn’t only about revisiting history. It’s about learning how markets recover, how investor psychology drives behavior, and why every downturn, no matter how severe, eventually gives rise to new growth. This is a complete look at every major stock market crash — from Wall Street’s darkest days to today’s volatile digital markets.
Before diving into history, it’s important to understand why markets crash. Stock prices are determined by investor expectations — when optimism is high, prices rise; when fear takes over, they plummet. Crashes usually occur when markets become overvalued, fueled by speculation, debt, or unrealistic expectations.
External shocks — like wars, policy changes, or global pandemics — can also trigger panic selling. But the most consistent ingredient in every crash is emotion. Fear spreads faster than facts, and once panic begins, it feeds on itself. Yet, in nearly every case, what follows a crash is not permanent decline, but a cycle of correction, adaptation, and eventual recovery.
The Wall Street Crash of 1929 remains the most infamous in history. The “Roaring Twenties” had created a booming economy and an unprecedented rise in stock prices. Ordinary Americans, driven by optimism, began buying stocks on margin — borrowing money to invest.
By September 1929, markets reached record highs. But the foundation was fragile. When prices began to fall in October, panic selling erupted. On October 24, known as “Black Thursday,” the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 11%. Panic deepened over the next few days, culminating in “Black Tuesday,” October 29, when 16 million shares were traded in a single day.
The result was catastrophic. Billions of dollars in wealth evaporated overnight, and by 1932, the market had lost nearly 90% of its value. The crash didn’t just destroy financial portfolios — it shattered confidence in the economy and led to the Great Depression, a decade-long economic downturn that reshaped global finance and policy forever.
After decades of postwar growth, the early 1970s brought a new kind of crisis. Inflation was rising, growth was slowing, and in 1973, the OPEC oil embargo sent energy prices skyrocketing. The world entered a period of “stagflation” — high inflation combined with stagnant growth — a situation economists had rarely seen before.
Between 1973 and 1974, the Dow Jones fell nearly 45%. Investor confidence plummeted as unemployment rose and inflation eroded purchasing power. The collapse of the Bretton Woods system, which had tied the U.S. dollar to gold, also contributed to global financial instability.
This crash changed how investors viewed risk and inflation. It also paved the way for a new generation of monetary policies, including the interest rate hikes of the late 1970s that would eventually curb inflation and restore economic stability.
October 19, 1987, known as “Black Monday,” remains one of the most shocking one-day declines in stock market history. The Dow Jones fell 22.6% in a single session — a drop that would be equivalent to thousands of points today.
Unlike the 1929 crash, this one wasn’t caused by a long buildup of economic weakness. Instead, it was a combination of computerized trading, market psychology, and global contagion. As automated trading systems triggered sell orders, panic spread across markets worldwide.
Despite the dramatic plunge, the economy itself remained relatively strong. Within two years, the market had fully recovered. Black Monday became a defining moment for risk management and led to the introduction of “circuit breakers,” mechanisms designed to halt trading when markets fall too sharply.
The late 1990s saw the rise of the internet — and a wave of speculative mania. Investors poured billions into technology startups, many of which had little more than a business plan and a website. Stocks with “.com” in their names skyrocketed, and traditional valuation metrics were ignored.
By early 2000, the Nasdaq Composite had climbed over 400% in five years. But when investors began questioning profitability, the bubble burst. From March 2000 to October 2002, the Nasdaq fell nearly 78%. Trillions in market value vanished, and countless startups collapsed overnight.
The dot-com crash was painful, but it also paved the way for real innovation. Companies that survived — like Amazon, eBay, and Google — went on to define the modern digital economy. It was a harsh reminder that while technology evolves quickly, market fundamentals never go out of style.
The 2008 crash, often called the “Great Recession,” was the worst economic collapse since 1929. It began in the U.S. housing market, where years of easy credit and risky lending practices had inflated a massive bubble. When homeowners began defaulting on subprime mortgages, banks and investors worldwide were exposed to trillions in toxic assets.
As panic spread, major financial institutions like Lehman Brothers collapsed, while others required government bailouts. The Dow Jones fell over 50% from its 2007 highs, and global markets followed. Millions lost their homes, jobs, and savings.
The crash revealed the dangers of excessive leverage, poor regulation, and blind trust in financial institutions. In response, governments introduced sweeping reforms — such as the Dodd-Frank Act — aimed at preventing another systemic collapse. The recovery was slow but transformative, reshaping the way banks operate and how investors view risk.
On May 6, 2010, the Dow Jones suddenly plunged nearly 1,000 points in minutes — only to recover almost as quickly. This “Flash Crash” was unlike any in history. It wasn’t caused by economic weakness or investor panic, but by a glitch in high-frequency trading algorithms.
Automated systems began executing massive sell orders in fractions of a second, overwhelming markets and triggering a cascade of electronic trades. Within minutes, billions in market value had disappeared — and then reappeared.
The event highlighted a new kind of risk in the digital age: the vulnerability of modern markets to technology and automation. Regulators responded by implementing tighter controls and better oversight of algorithmic trading systems to prevent future disruptions.
In 2015, China’s booming stock market came crashing down. After a period of rapid growth fueled by speculative investing and easy credit, the Shanghai Composite Index lost nearly 30% of its value in just three weeks.
The Chinese government attempted to stabilize the market through trading halts and interventions, but panic had already set in. The crash sent shockwaves through global markets, highlighting China’s growing influence on the world economy.
While the losses were largely contained within China, the event underscored how interconnected global markets had become. It also served as a warning about the risks of excessive speculation and the limits of government control in open financial systems.
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered one of the fastest market crashes in history. In February and March 2020, as the virus spread globally, lockdowns brought economies to a standstill. The Dow Jones fell over 35% in just a few weeks — wiping out years of gains.
Investors feared a repeat of the Great Depression as unemployment soared and businesses shut down. Central banks responded with massive stimulus packages, cutting interest rates to near zero and injecting liquidity into the system. Remarkably, this aggressive response helped the market rebound almost as quickly as it fell.
By mid-2021, markets had not only recovered but reached new record highs. The COVID crash demonstrated both the fragility and resilience of modern markets — and how monetary policy can stabilize global finance in times of crisis.
After years of stimulus and near-zero interest rates, the post-pandemic world faced a new threat: inflation. By 2022, prices were rising at the fastest pace in four decades, forcing central banks to raise interest rates aggressively. The result was a steep decline in global stock markets.
Technology stocks, which had thrived during the pandemic, were hit hardest as investors shifted away from riskier assets. The S&P 500 fell over 20%, marking an official bear market. Bond prices also plunged, creating one of the worst years in decades for balanced portfolios.
Unlike past crashes triggered by panic, this downturn was a deliberate cooling of an overheated economy. Though painful, it represented a return to more normal conditions after years of unprecedented monetary support.
Looking back, every major crash — from 1929 to today — follows a familiar pattern: a period of euphoria, followed by fear, panic, and eventual recovery. The key lessons are timeless.
Understanding these lessons doesn’t eliminate risk, but it helps transform uncertainty into strategy. The investors who study history are often the ones who survive — and thrive — through future downturns.
Today’s markets are faster, more global, and more interconnected than ever before. Crashes may unfold differently, but the principles of protection remain the same.
These principles don’t guarantee immunity from volatility, but they build resilience — the difference between those who panic and those who profit when the next downturn comes.
Though painful, market crashes are not purely destructive — they are a form of renewal. They clear out excess speculation, correct overvalued assets, and force industries to innovate and rebuild stronger foundations. Each crash in history has led to reforms, smarter regulation, and more efficient markets.
The crash of 1929 birthed modern financial oversight. The 1987 collapse led to circuit breakers. The 2008 crisis reshaped global banking. And the 2020 pandemic crash revolutionized digital finance and remote investing. Crashes expose weaknesses, but they also drive evolution — reminding investors that resilience is built through adversity.
From 1929’s Great Depression to the digital-age downturns of today, stock market crashes have shaped not just economies, but entire generations of investors. Each one serves as both a warning and a teacher — revealing the consequences of excess, the power of emotion, and the enduring strength of recovery.
The truth is that no crash lasts forever. Markets, like people, adapt and rebuild. The key is not to fear the fall, but to understand it — to learn from history and approach the future with patience, perspective, and preparedness. Because in every downturn lies the seed of the next opportunity, waiting for those who stay calm enough to see it.
© 2026 Passive Income Live
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑