and put all of your money there. Which stock would you buy?
Breaks the number one rule of investing - diversification - but I you're implying what is the safest stock to invest in on the exchange, outside of a diversified fund, I would say IFT.
For me IFT as well. IFT business model is thought out and not capital constrained as many other companies are.
When it hits rockbottom A2. First, how much lower will it go
Quote from: Playa on Jun 05, 2026, 12:38 PMand put all of your money there. Which stock would you buy?
Lol, I did that 2 years ago and put all my share market eggs into one SPK basket and they went down about 380K. Learnt my lesson and now have many baskets.
Quote from: Habitz on Jun 05, 2026, 04:45 PMWhen it hits rockbottom A2. First, how much lower will it go
Good bounce since
Going to an IFT presentation this week I was impressed, and I plan to add to my holding on a down day. But the one share I would choose would Hallenstein Glasson. Cheap pe, good yield and good growth.
USH (Smart S&P 500 NZ dollar hedged ETF)
But if that is considered cheating....
Current pick is MHJ (Michael Hill)
I'd cheat and pick TWF smart shares Total World Fund but if you couldn't cheat I'd choose HLG for all the reasons I've stated in that thread.
Disc: HLG is my largest investment position making up circa 20% of my portfolio.
Quote from: Basil on Jun 12, 2026, 10:32 PMI'd cheat and pick TWF smart shares Total World Fund but if you couldn't cheat I'd choose HLG for all the reasons I've stated in that thread.
Disc: HLG is my largest investment position making up circa 20% of my portfolio.
Hi Beagle do you see the Aussie downturn and higher rates as a reason to be cautious re HLG?
I'm not especially concerned entrep. Their target market is 13-30 years. I doubt many are homeowners in that age bracket so interest rates are not a material concern. HLG have been very resilient throughout the challenging years of Covid.
Quote from: Basil on Jun 12, 2026, 10:32 PMI'd cheat and pick TWF smart shares Total World Fund but if you couldn't cheat I'd choose HLG for all the reasons I've stated in that thread.
Disc: HLG is my largest investment position making up circa 20% of my portfolio.
20% purchase or worth?
I would pick the same, though Space X makes me nervous
Agree a world ETF for sure OR I would look for an "ARISTOCRAT"
Wall Street defines a 'dividend aristocrat' as an S&P 500 company that has increased its dividend every single year for at least 25 consecutive years. There are currently 69 constituents in the S&P 500 that have achieved this title. However, there is only one dividend aristocrat on the ASX – Washington H Soul Pattinson ("Soul Patts", ticker SOL.ASX).
The NZX and ASX are the two highest yielding markets in the world and hence dividends are important as they form a significant component of the overall return from holding the stock.
No doubt HLG should be high in the priorities for inclusion in your NZX portfolio, particularly for dividend hounds. However, with its retail orientation HLG is exposed to AUS/NZ economic downturns.
For those seeking more diverse international economic protection for their portfolio with access to key infrastructure growth sectors such as Data Centres and Renewable energy, then IMO, IFT should be the current top priority for inclusion in any NZX portfolio.
By 2030 IFT's Longroad will be producing more renewable energy that NZ's entire energy sector is currently producing. (See my recent post #506 on the IFT thread for further details.) In terms of Data Centre's IFT leads the market in security, water circulated cooling and confirmed renewable energy supply.
In the last 5 yrs IFT boasts total shareholder return (TSR) = 22.8% pa
In the last 10 yrs IFT's TSR = 19.2%
Since inception, IFT's TSR = 18.4%
IFT's TSR has historically been more biased to tax free capital gains via SP growth cf to dividend returns. However, this is changing, and IFT in its recent Shareholder updates committed to increased emphasis on dividend returns in the near future.
Agreed LF. There's a place for retail in a balanced portfolio (although not in mine ;) ) but when one focuses too much on dividends it's easy to lose sight of stocks like IFT, who are probably one of the most defensive stocks on the exchange, and yet as your graphs and figures show, delivers total shareholder return that are consistently better than far riskier stocks.
I crunched the numbers a while back and inclusive of the consistent huge dividends HLG has paid every year in the last decade their total shareholder return has comfortably exceeded IFT. This growth has been achieved with no debt, no share issuance and no expansion of the very modest PE metric it trades on.
My 20% portfolio allocation is based on its current price which has nearly quadrupled in the last decade.
Quote from: Basil on Jun 14, 2026, 02:32 PMI crunched the numbers a while back and inclusive of the consistent huge dividends HLG has paid every year in the last decade their total shareholder return has comfortably exceeded IFT. This growth has been achieved with no debt, no share issuance and no expansion of the very modest PE metric it trades on.
My 20% portfolio allocation is based on its current price which has nearly quadrupled in the last decade.
I think your insistence that it's some sort of either/or competition between IFT and HLG rather proves the point of the dangers of being too one-eyed. By all means have HLG as 20% of your holdings if your'e comfortable with that. But that doesn't mean that those of us with 20% (or more) of our holdings in IFT are wrong, or somehow missing out. Personally, HLG doesn't fit my investment profile and I think it's reached its peak as to what the market will pay for a clothing retailer. But that's just me. As I keep having to say - there's different ways of making (and losing) money in shares.
I think its you who is too defensive. I'm not advocating either/or at all. You stated something that was factually incorrect, that IFT's 10 year TSR was superior, I was simply telling you that I have crunched the numbers and can tell you you're wrong.
Actually all I said was "IFT delivers total shareholder return that are consistently better than far riskier stocks." I didn't even mentioned HLG except in my last post which was about it not being an either/or - that diversity is key.
It's clear you are very sensitive to a different view on the stocks you pick. Lighten up.
For what it's worth:
AI Overview
Over the last decade, Infratil (NZX:IFT) has significantly outperformed Hallenstein Glasson Holdings (NZX:HLG) in Total Shareholder Return (TSR).
Infratil generated an annualized post-tax return of approximately 17.3% per year, growing a hypothetical investment nearly fivefold, while Hallenstein Glasson delivered a cumulative return of around 277% (14.2% annualized).
Quote from: LoungeLizard on Jun 14, 2026, 07:33 PMFor what it's worth:
AI Overview
Over the last decade, Infratil (NZX:IFT) has significantly outperformed Hallenstein Glasson Holdings (NZX:HLG) in Total Shareholder Return (TSR).
Infratil generated an annualized post-tax return of approximately 17.3% per year, growing a hypothetical investment nearly fivefold, while Hallenstein Glasson delivered a cumulative return of around 277% (14.2% annualized).
Quote from: LoungeLizard on Jun 14, 2026, 03:02 PMI think your insistence that it's some sort of either/or competition between IFT and HLG rather proves the point of the dangers of being too one-eyed. By all means have HLG as 20% of your holdings if your'e comfortable with that. But that doesn't mean that those of us with 20% (or more) of our holdings in IFT are wrong, or somehow missing out....
Thanks LL. Your posts are spot on - particularly #16 above.
As I have said before, there is no right or wrong with share investing....just different returns.
My last point is that all the figures quoted by Basil and myself are historic.
It's the next 5 to 10 years that will really count, and I see much greater future potential for IFT than HLG is ever likely to achieve.
Data Centres, renewable energy etc etc are huge growth sectors internationally, and the IFT team are very well positioned.
Quote from: LoungeLizard on Jun 14, 2026, 07:33 PMFor what it's worth:
AI Overview
Over the last decade, Infratil (NZX:IFT) has significantly outperformed Hallenstein Glasson Holdings (NZX:HLG) in Total Shareholder Return (TSR).
Infratil generated an annualized post-tax return of approximately 17.3% per year, growing a hypothetical investment nearly fivefold, while Hallenstein Glasson delivered a cumulative return of around 277% (14.2% annualized).
Its not worth much. A.I. is just picking up the movement in the share price which is correct. HLG was $2.70 in mid 2016 when I bought in. The share price has grown at a 14% CAGR in line with EPS growth rate, so that part of A.I. is correct but I was getting 15% gross yield when I bought in on top of the 14% annual share price growth so that has to be factored into the total shareholder return. If the 14% capital growth per annum worked in a linear manner I was getting 29% TSR per annum from the outset but of course dividends have grown over the years. Based on Forsyth Barr forecast dividends for next year and assuming 60% imputation my gross yield on purchase price next year is 35%. Factor that in and calculate the total shareholder return for me will you.
Each to their own but I can't feed my family on the miserable 1.4% yield IFT pays, that's one thing for certain !
Basil , with respect, the topic of this thread is not "lets all ask Basil what we should do."
This thread is not about your fabulous investing success.
I know it is dangerous and scary for someone with your strong religious zeal, but how about reigning in your ego and at least be open minded enough to allow others to contribute their thoughts on this topic.
You don't have to out-shout and out-post everyone .
"You don't have to out-shout and out-post everyone" Thank you Left Field, very well put.
Quote from: Left Field on Jun 15, 2026, 07:55 AMThis thread is not about your fabulous investing success.
That rich coming from someone that frequently reminds us all of their investing success. Just have a look at the Gentrack or Tower threads for examples of that.
Its not just about return on capital employed. Its also about return
of capital employed. In the last 10 years HLG has repaid investors who bought in the late $2 range, $4.18 in dividends and repaid their investment more than 1.5 times over. All future dividends are based on a free carry investment.
Anyway, each to their own, that's about the only thing I agree with you about.
If you go back to what the discussion was about Basil, you took umbrage at my general assertion that:
"IFT delivers total shareholder return that are consistently better than far riskier stocks."
You made it into a contest between HLG and IFT (even though I said it wasn't a competition) and you said:
"You stated something that was factually incorrect, that IFT's 10 year TSR was superior, I was simply telling you that I have crunched the numbers and can tell you you're wrong.
But it turns out that IFT DOES have a superior TSR to HLG. Rather than acknowledge your mistake you are now talking about yield, which is totally different. And on that I am sure you are aware that TOTAL shareholder return includes dividends. I can give you the breakdown of how AI comes up with the overview if you're interested.
Wouldn't it be far easier, and mature, to just say that both HLG and IFT have done incredibly well over the last 10 years, rather than shout down anyone who approaches investing differently - and consequently picks different stocks to yourself?
Look lizard, I have already put the opening and closing 10 year values of HLG into a CAGR calculator and the annual CAGR just for capital gains is 14% per annum.
Add in the 15% gross yield I was getting at the start, increasing during the tenure of my holding and it's quite obvious the TSR for HLG has far exceeded IFT in the last decade.
Happy to share a link to the CAGR calculator I use if you're interested. Don't believe everything A.I. tells you.
Its not a competition, I was merely explaining why I prefer HLG with the yield. Each to their own.
Quote from: Basil on Jun 17, 2026, 03:00 PMLook lizard, I have already put the opening and closing 10 year values of HLG into a CAGR calculator and the annual CAGR just for capital gains is 14% per annum.
Add in the 15% gross yield I was getting at the start, increasing during the tenure of my holding and it's quite obvious the TSR for HLG has far exceeded IFT in the last decade.
Happy to share a link to the CAGR calculator I use if you're interested. Don't believe everything A.I. tells you.
Its not a competition, I was merely explaining why I prefer HLG with the yield. Each to their own.
Fair enough. If it isn't a competition then please don't act as though it is. Actions speak louder than words.
I have a full break down of the AI analysis - if you're interested - which references all the figures back to annual reports. As I say, it includes dividends - so your fixation on gross yield is immaterial. And on that it probably overstates the HLG TSR because it assumes dll dividends are re-invested, which by the sounds of things you don't do. So the return would be even less.
Here's the CAGR calculator I use. https://cagrcalculator.net/result/
Suggest you put opening value of $2.70 and closing value of $10.00 in there and the period is 10 years.
After entering those values you will see for yourself that the capital growth component only of HLG is 14% per annum.
Add to that average annual capital gain the yield each year and you will get the TSR. The first year was 15% gross inclusive of imputation credits, i.e first year total shareholder return was 14% capital gain + 15% yield = 29% but the 15% yield was taxable so for people on a 33% tax rate the net shareholder return in year 1 was 14% capital gain + 10% net yield = 24%. Dividends have gone up over the years.
Quote from: Basil on Jun 17, 2026, 03:54 PMHere's the CAGR calculator I use. https://cagrcalculator.net/result/
Suggest you put opening value of $2.70 and closing value of $10.00 in there and the period is 10 years.
After entering those values you will see for yourself that the capital growth component only of HLG is 14% per annum.
Add to that average annual capital gain the yield each year and you will get the TSR. The first year was 15% gross inclusive of imputation credits, i.e first year total shareholder return was 14% capital gain + 15% yield = 29% but the 15% yield was taxable so for people on a 33% tax rate the net shareholder return in year 1 was 14% capital gain + 10% net yield = 24%. Dividends have gone up over the years.
With respect - this is a nonsense way to compare the return from two stocks. Total returns are share price growth & total money paid out in dividends. IFT outperformed.
Trying to frame today's dividend yield, as today's dividend amount vs the share price 10 years ago is silly.
You've missed the point completely LEK. The average capital gain has been 14% per annum for the last 10 years. Additional to the capital gains the dividend yield started at 15% gross 10 years ago. Its much higher today. Add the two together and you get total shareholder return. HLG don't have analysts who need to trumpet their TSR to shareholders to justify their egregiously high management fees like Morrison's need to do. Sorry, I can't make it any more simple than that.
Ask A.I. yourself, try and dumb it down so A.I. can calculate it for you. If I bought a share for $2.70 10 years ago that's now worth $10 and along the way it paid 41.8 cps in dividends every year, (dividends varied each year but I tried to dumb it down for A.I.), what would my annual TSR be ?
A.I. can't seem to perform the task, I have tried asking it twice. It consistently adds the capital gain of $7.30 to the dividends received of $4.18 and assumes the total return inclusive of all dividends is earned at the end of the 10 year term, (obviously with dividends paid throughout the term the actual return is much higher as the dividends can be reinvested).
A huge part of HLG's performance has always been its dividends so with A.I. incorrectly calculating the CAGR I would need to spend a considerable amount of time running the actual calculations myself....but none of you naysayers would believe me so there seems no point in bothering.
FWIW which is very little, A.I. gives an annual TSR of 18.04% per year using its fundamentally flawed calculation methodology.
P.S. See the HLG thread. I have crunched all the numbers manually this morning because I was curious and the average annual TSR is 23.5% for the last decade. Its not a straight line though and some years were negative so its best to hold this one long term.
Quote from: Basil on Jun 17, 2026, 03:54 PMHere's the CAGR calculator I use. https://cagrcalculator.net/result/
Suggest you put opening value of $2.70 and closing value of $10.00 in there and the period is 10 years.
After entering those values you will see for yourself that the capital growth component only of HLG is 14% per annum.
Add to that average annual capital gain the yield each year and you will get the TSR. The first year was 15% gross inclusive of imputation credits, i.e first year total shareholder return was 14% capital gain + 15% yield = 29% but the 15% yield was taxable so for people on a 33% tax rate the net shareholder return in year 1 was 14% capital gain + 10% net yield = 24%. Dividends have gone up over the years.
You said, it wasn't a competition and yet here you are again with your "my CAGR is bigger than yours." Which actually it isn't but to be honest it's immaterial. Why? Because it isn't a competition!
I see from your posts on other high quality stocks like FPH that you simply can't get your head around what you would classify as high PE, no growth companies. Which makes me wonder when so called no-growth companies like IFT (and FPH) continue to grow and return outstanding TSR how do you deal with the paradox. By slating them off and anyone who follows them, it appears.
This thread is actually about what people would buy if they could only buy one stock. ie what they would buy now. I really doubt whether anyone, apart from yourself apparently, would put all their money on HLG, regardless of past performance. They would look for a company that is diversified across a number of essential industries and has a good track record of growing one's capital. To me that's IFT in a nutshell.
And as far the future is concerned, which is really what we should be looking at, then IFT with it's investment in Renewables and Datacentres beginning to show remarkable returns, is really the one to look out for. I have no doubt that it will continue to show total returns of around 15-20% annually to shareholders. I really can't see HLG showing much capital gain beyond where it is now. Even paying $10 for a clothing retailer is not very sensible in my view. IFT on the other hand will soon be worth more than FPH and it's just a matter of time that the SP approaches $30-$40. Can you really say the same about HLG? Oh, that's right - you did say that HLG could be worth $30 one day. Pity no-one believes you.
I'm done with this thread. Its a bit of a silly thread anyway and as I stated from the outset I would choose TWF because a diversified portfolio is important. That said, without a "cheat" option HLG would be my next pick. I've stated my opinion, defended the disinformation against it and stated the correct returns. There's nothing more to say and I can't be bothered arguing with obtuse argumentative people. It wouldn't matter what I said in this post to reply to the one above, there would be another snarky cynical reply come back in due course as sure as night follows day. Life is too short.
Quote from: Basil on Jun 18, 2026, 08:10 PMI'm done with this thread. Its a bit of a silly thread anyway and as I stated from the outset I would choose TWF because a diversified portfolio is important. That said, without a "cheat" option HLG would be my next pick. I've stated my opinion, defended the disinformation against it and stated the correct returns. There's nothing more to say and I can't be bothered arguing with obtuse argumentative people. It wouldn't matter what I said in this post to reply to the one above, there would be another snarky cynical reply come back in due course as sure as night follows day, supported by the usual suspects. Life is too short.
Not an ounce of self-reflection as to why you repeatedly wind people up with your know-it-all attitude. I would value your contributions a hell of a lot more if they were delivered with a bit of respect for others views. I'm not holding my breath on that.
Quote from: LoungeLizard on Jun 18, 2026, 08:19 PMNot an ounce of self-reflection as to why you repeatedly wind people up with your know-it-all attitude. I would value your contributions a hell of a lot more if they were delivered with a bit of respect for others views. I'm not holding my breath on that.
folks, weather is nice (though cold), but the sun is shining ... there are much better things to do than wind each other up ...
Related to future sharevalues - I guess we all know, that there are different ways to come up with a prediction.
Some people value shares according to their income and growth (and no doubt, looking into the future they sometimes get it right and they often get it wrong).
Some people value shares according to the underlying value of the company (which sometiems describes the future value and often does not)
and ...
some people value shares according to the story told (which is always exciting, but not normally related to whats happening in the future).
clearly - beagle and LL seem to use different methods to guess a future company valuaton ... and no doubt, both can find situations where their method worked (for some time) - and no doubt - we all can find situations where the applied method didn't work.
As you know - no matter how you try to predict the future, while it is easy to predict, the problem is it is not possible to make the outcome of the predictions better than what statistics will give us.
Maybe we just leave this forum as an opportunity to learn about other ideas ...
Quote from: BlackPeter on Jun 19, 2026, 11:58 AMfolks, weather is nice (though cold), but the sun is shining ... there are much better things to do than wind each other up ...
Related to future sharevalues - I guess we all know, that there are different ways to come up with a prediction.
Some people value shares according to their income and growth (and no doubt, looking into the future they sometimes get it right and they often get it wrong).
Some people value shares according to the underlying value of the company (which sometiems describes the future value and often does not)
and ...
some people value shares according to the story told (which is always exciting, but not normally related to whats happening in the future).
clearly - beagle and LL seem to use different methods to guess a future company valuaton ... and no doubt, both can find situations where their method worked (for some time) - and no doubt - we all can find situations where the applied method didn't work.
As you know - no matter how you try to predict the future, while it is easy to predict, the problem is it is not possible to make the outcome of the predictions better than what statistics will give us.
Maybe we just leave this forum as an opportunity to learn about other ideas ...
Totally agree BP. The forum is about sharing ideas not about passing judgement on others. Everybody's experience - good, bad, indifferent - has value.
Well, I only own one NZX share, and its IKE. Its actually the first NZX stock i've bought since 2018 ;D
Not looking for an argument with Basil about buying expensive, loss making stocks. Just riding the trend.
Quote from: KW on Jun 24, 2026, 02:22 PMWell, I only own one NZX share, and its IKE. Its actually the first NZX stock i've bought since 2018 ;D
Not looking for an argument with Basil about buying expensive, loss making stocks. Just riding the trend.
Speaking of capital gains via SP appreciation maybe it's timely to check the 2026 Stock Picking competition results YTD (half way through the year,) to see if we can find
the one stock to beat them all.Interestingly currently only 28% of the posters making picks are making money YTD.
Here's a slightly random selection of the positive results YTD;
2cc up 22%
AFT up 11.6%
HLG up 4%
IFT up 38%
IKE up 17%
PEB up 62%
PHL up 35%
RUA up 95%
TWR up 4%