Company Description: The Procter & Gamble Company is a leading consumer products company that markets household and personal care products in more than 180 countries.
Fair Value: In calculating fair value, I consider the NPV MMA Differential Fair Value along with these four calculations of fair value, see page 2 of the linked PDF for a detailed description:
1. Avg. High Yield Price
2. 20-Year DCF Price
3. Avg. P/E Price
4. Graham Number
PG is trading at a discount to only 3.) above. Since PG's tangible book value is not meaningful, a Graham number can not be calculated. When also considering the NPV MMA Differential, the stock is trading at a 87.9% premium to its calculated fair value of $78.53. PG did not earn any Stars in this section.
Dividend Analytical Data: In this section there are three possible Stars and three key metrics, see page 2 of the linked PDF for a detailed description:
1. Free Cash Flow Payout
2. Debt To Total Capital
3. Key Metrics
4. Dividend Growth Rate
5. Years of Div. Growth
6. Rolling 4-yr Div. > 15%
PG earned one Star in this section for 2.) above. The stock earned a Star as a result of its most recent Debt to Total Capital being less than 45% The company has paid a cash dividend to shareholders every year since 1891 and has increased its dividend payments for 66 consecutive years.
Dividend Income vs. MMA: Why would you assume the equity risk and invest in a dividend stock if you could earn a better return in a much less risky money market account (MMA) or Treasury bond? This section compares the earning ability of this stock with a high yield MMA. Two items are considered in this section, see page 2 of the linked PDF for a detailed description:
1. NPV MMA Diff.
2. Years to > MMA
The negative NPV MMA Diff. means that on a NPV basis the dividend earnings from an investment in PG would be less than a similar amount invested in MMA earning a 20-year average rate of 3.75%. If PG grows its dividend at 1.0% per year, it will never equal a MMA yielding an estimated 20-year average rate of 3.75%.
Peers: The company’s peer group includes: Clorox Corporation (CLX) with a 3.4% yield, Colgate-Palmolive Co. (CL) with a 2.4% yield, and Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) with a 3.8% yield.
Conclusion:PG did not earn any Stars in the Fair Value section, earned one Star in the Dividend Analytical Data section and did not earn any Stars in the Dividend Income vs. MMA section for a total of one Star. This quantitatively ranks PG as a 1-Star Very Weak stock.
Using my D4L-PreScreen.xls model, I determined the share price would need to decrease to $74.20 before PG's NPV MMA Differential increased to the $500 minimum that I look for in a stock with 66 years of consecutive dividend increases. At that price the stock would yield 5.0%.
Resetting the D4L-PreScreen.xls model and solving for the dividend growth rate needed to generate the target $500 NPV MMA Differential, the calculated rate is 8.1%. This dividend growth rate is higher than the 1.0% used in this analysis, thus providing no margin of safety. PG has a risk rating of 1.75 which classifies it as a Medium risk stock.
The company's free cash flow payout at 62% (down from 69% in the previous review) is above my desired maximum of 60%. The low debt to total capital of 43% (flat with previous) is below my desired maximum. PG is trading well above my calculated fair value of $78.53. For now, I will wait for a more opportune time before adding to my position.
Disclaimer: Material presented here is for informational purposes only. The above quantitative stock analysis, including the Star rating, is mechanically calculated and is based on historical information. The analysis assumes the stock will perform in the future as it has in the past. This is generally never true. Before buying or selling any stock you should do your own research and reach your own conclusion. See my Disclaimer for more information.
Full Disclosure: At the time of this writing, I was long PG (5.3% of my Dividend Growth Portfolio) and long KMB.
Related Articles:
- Sysco Corporation (SYY) Dividend Stock Analysis
