Well, I would first start by thanking WSJ for giving us the date on which ‘this time is different’ was published on the subject, to officially begin the process of it being proven otherwise. Yes, the dividend yield is at an all-time low on the index itself, given its run-up and shifting in tech weighting within it. No, that doesn’t change the evergreen investment advantage that companies with rising dividend payments have outperformed the broad market over the past 50 years, and with less volatility.

I suppose I could be cheeky with the author and say 1999 just called and wants its article idea back – but I’ll take the high ground, and I, of course, do understand the interest. Of course, AI Capex, buybacks, and the high-flying performance have driven some to question history; that is to be expected. It was the same in the 1990s, just before the ‘lost decade’ of broad market returns from 2000-2010, when dividend growers outperformed by 5% per year. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that era is assuredly coming back, or if so, when, but I would just point to the simple premise and value proposition.

Companies with growing dividends that compound at 6-8% annually are, by definition, more durable cash flows and business models in order to do so. CAPEX and share buybacks are discretionary and cyclical by comparison, but yes, some periods favor one approach over the other. That doesn’t mean there isn’t an opportunity to have exposure to AI within the dividend portfolio, either. From the largest alternative manager in the world being the major underwriter of data center finance, to the world’s largest networking and IT services companies in the portfolio. I say it’s a ‘both/and’ portfolio answer rather than a monolithic one-or-the-other answer the article suggests.