Dividends once defined long-term investing — stable, predictable, and dependable. But Apple rewrote the script. Instead of sending cash to shareholders, it built a $10 trillion movement powered by buybacks. That shift changed how investors earn, how companies manage capital, and how wealth compounds in the modern market. What started as a financial tweak has become a revolution — one that’s redefining income for the next generation.

Let’s embark on this transformative journey together and position your portfolio for success in this evolving market landscape!

Be sure to read through to the end to catch all the valuable insights this newsletter delivers to your inbox today.

For generations, the dividend was sacred. It was the quiet handshake between companies and their shareholders — a promise that if you owned a piece of the business, you shared in its profits. That promise built the backbone of long-term investing. It wasn’t exciting, but it was reliable.

Then, quietly, the structure shifted. What had been a cornerstone of American investing began to erode — not because of crisis, but because of evolution.

Over the past 30 years, the S&P 500’s total dividend payout has dropped nearly 49%. Three decades ago, nearly 78% of U.S. companies paid dividends. By 2018, that number had fallen to 43%. It didn’t happen by accident. It happened because Apple changed the playbook.

When Apple reintroduced its dividend in 2012, it did so modestly — deliberately. The real story wasn’t in the check investors received. It was in the stock buyback machine that Apple had quietly built in the background.

That model reshaped corporate finance. Where dividends represented permanence, buybacks represented control. Apple proved that a company could still “reward shareholders” without locking itself into an obligation. Flexibility became the new virtue.

Boards across the market noticed. Within a decade, the promise of regular cash payments gave way to a new mechanism — one that could be turned on or off at will, without headlines or shareholder outrage.

Here’s the mechanics of the shift — and why it’s been so powerful.

Imagine a company earning $1 billion in profit with 1 billion shares outstanding. That’s $1 of earnings per share. Now, if the company uses $100 million to buy back 10% of its stock, profits haven’t changed. But the math has. That same $1 billion is now divided by 900 million shares — and suddenly, earnings per share jump to $1.11.

No new customers. No product breakthroughs. Just financial engineering. Yet Wall Street celebrates it as growth.

Buybacks create flexibility, polish earnings, and conceal dilution from executive stock options — all while deferring shareholder taxes until a sale. Dividends, on the other hand, are immediate, taxable, and irreversible. In a world where CFOs prize optionality, the choice became obvious.

And Apple’s template spread fast. From Netflix to Disney, AT&T to Paramount, boardrooms adopted the same quiet strategy: reduce or eliminate dividends, increase buybacks, and keep the stock price narrative intact.

Disney, for instance, ended a 60-year streak of dividend payments in 2020. When it finally returned, the payout was cut from 88 cents to just 30 cents — a 66% reduction. AT&T, once a symbol of dividend reliability, halved its payout after the WarnerMedia deal. Paramount eliminated its 5% yielding dividend altogether in 2024.

Each decision followed the same rationale: in uncertain times, variable levers are safer than permanent promises.

The data tells the real story of what replaced dividends.

From 2010 through 2024, U.S. companies distributed roughly $7 trillion in dividends — but over $10 trillion in buybacks. And in 2024 alone, S&P 500 companies spent nearly $1 trillion repurchasing shares, compared to $642 billion on dividends. That’s the largest gap ever recorded.

If that buyback cash had been paid out as dividends, the S&P 500’s average yield wouldn’t sit at 1.2%. It would be closer to 3% — more than double what investors actually receive today.

The companies driving this transformation are the same ones leading the market:

The math makes one thing clear: dividends aren’t disappearing because companies lack cash. They’re disappearing because buybacks offer control.

That control is strategic — and tax-efficient. Dividends trigger immediate taxes; buybacks don’t. Retiring shares inflates per-share earnings and masks executive compensation dilution. Shareholders see growth on paper, while management keeps more flexibility behind the scenes.

This quiet revolution left a gap — especially for investors who depended on regular income.

For decades, dividends represented nearly 40–50% of the total return of U.S. stocks. Today, that figure hovers closer to 15%. The market didn’t stop generating cash; it simply redirected it. And income investors were left searching for substitutes.

That’s where “synthetic dividends” entered the picture — funds that manufacture income through derivatives, such as covered call ETFs. The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF (JEPI) became the poster child. Launched in 2020, it has ballooned to over $41 billion in assets, making it the largest actively managed ETF in the U.S. Its sibling, JPEQ, adds another $29 billion.

Together, these funds — along with their peers — now manage more than $150 billion in synthetic income strategies. It sounds impressive, until you compare it with the $10 trillion companies have spent on buybacks since 2010. Investors are essentially paying Wall Street to recreate what used to come naturally through dividends.

The trade-off isn’t minor. JEPI’s 2024 return was 13%, compared with the S&P 500’s 25%. The income comes with capped upside, higher fees, and heavier tax treatment. Most of its payouts are taxed as ordinary income rather than the lower 15% qualified dividend rate, cutting after-tax returns significantly.

The conclusion is unavoidable: investors are now renting the feeling of dividend income — and paying for what once was free.

But the pendulum may be swinging again.

The same megacaps that once led the buyback revolution are maturing. Their growth rates are slowing. Capital expenditures are stabilizing. And balance sheets are swelling with cash. That combination tends to force a reckoning: eventually, the money has to go somewhere.

We’re already seeing the early signs of a dividend renaissance.

These aren’t token gestures; they’re strategic signals. They mark the transition from pure growth to sustainable capital return. Apple followed this exact path when it reinstated its dividend in 2012 — and today, it’s among the most stable dividend payers in the world.

If history holds, today’s new dividend initiators — Meta, Alphabet, and their peers — could become tomorrow’s dividend aristocrats. Two decades from now, the companies that replaced the dividend may become the ones that revive it.

It’s a cycle as old as capitalism itself: innovation disrupts, stability returns, and investors recalibrate. The next generation of income investing won’t look like the one that came before — but it will rhyme.

For investors who understand this shift, the opportunity isn’t in mourning the death of dividends. It’s in recognizing that the next wave of reliable income may come from the very companies that once killed it.

Ready to Revolutionize Your Wealth?

Here's what's waiting for you:

With the world becoming increasingly digital, this question will be on the minds of millions of people looking for new income streams in 2025.

The answer is—Absolutely!

Thank you for taking the time to read today’s email! Your support is what allows me to send out this newsletter for free every day. 

 What do you think of the new format? Please provide your feedback in the poll below, and if you find the newsletter valuable, feel free to share it with other investors!

Disclaimer: This newsletter is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. Please consult with a financial advisor before making any investment decisions.