Can anybody explain to me why BHP (LON:BHP) has a highly speculative risk rating. It is a significant part of my portfolio and I wonder whether I should reduce what has been a good long term hold for me with a good dividend.
Cannot explain.
However can tell you that on the New York exchange version it has 'Balanced' risk rating.
I recently increased my holding in anticipation of the 10 Jan x-div Special cut-off and will review the situation depending on price action afterwards.
Before the risk-ratings introduction BHP dropped to 632p in February 2016 and carried
a Value rating of 94 and Quality of 85.
Today that is Value 67 Quality 98 in London and in New York Value 77 Quality 99.
It has been better explained elsewhere that the Cyclicals have their best metrics at the top of the cycle. The top was clearly 2011, the jury is out on subsequent events.
I have always preferred BHP to RIO since the latter overpaid for Alcan. BHP was better for me when it had more oil assets but it is still diversified, a subsidiary recently mined one of the largest diamond finds in recent times. So I shall be sorry to see it go but value is probably up with events since the activist forced divestment of shale-assets.
As an aside there are several computer-glitch anomalies between the London data base and the statistics for dual-listed stocks in Amerika. One example is BATS (British American Tobacco) which has a low Quality rating of 44 in London but BTI ,its New York version, a Quality rating of 59.
An annoying feature is the ex-dividend dates are often not provided in the American data-base, I have to go to other sources.
It partly depends on the type of N.Y. listing.
BHP is the best version, not only is the date listed but it is the same as in London. Lower down the scale the ex-divi date is a day earlier in New York to allow the back-office to catch up.
Hope this helps.
