Skip to content
All library documents

Using Dividend Histories to Assess Stock Value and Growth

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Bob

Summary

The document considers whether a stock’s dividend history can improve on the Gordon Growth Model, which values shares by discounting future dividends under a constant growth assumption. The proposed alternative fits an exponential curve to a run of annual dividends, potentially giving more weight to recent observations, to estimate future growth. No fitted example or performance comparison is presented.

The responses caution that dividend patterns are shaped by corporate policies as well as business conditions: boards may smooth or support payouts even when earnings and profits vary. A dividend-based price estimate could be compared with observed share prices, and additional inputs such as industry, earnings, and debt histories could help explain when dividends are more predictable. Past dividends alone cannot capture all drivers of share prices. A richer curve fit may use more data than a simple growth estimate, but it adds complexity and still does not establish reliable valuation accuracy.

Key ideas

  • The Gordon Growth Model assumes a constant rate of dividend growth.
  • An exponential curve fitted to several years of dividends is proposed as an alternative growth estimate.
  • Dividend policies may smooth payouts despite volatile earnings and profits.
  • A dividend-based valuation can be assessed by comparing its estimates with observed stock prices.
  • Past dividends alone are insufficient to capture all factors affecting stock value.

Tags

Full text
# Modeling the price of a stock based upon its dividend history


# Modeling the price of a stock based upon its dividend history












The value of a stock is the present value of all future dividends. This is sometimes called the Gordon Growth model. This model assumes that dividends increase at a constant rate. In the real world that may not be right. In addition, there is no way to know what the long term rate of the dividend growth will be.

One way, is to look at the current dividend rate and the dividend rate a while back. Say 10 years. You can them compute the annualized dividend rate.

It seems to me a better approach, would be to look at the annual dividend rate, say for 10 years and compute a exponential function for the dividend history. This function would be computed using a least squares approach possible giving more weight to recent dividends.

Would it be better to use the second approach over the first approach in computing the rate of growth in the dividend?

Please comment.

## Answer by Dimitri Vulis (score 2, accepted)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/75155

Your question borders on opinion-based, but I'll try.

Corporations' earnings and profits are volatile and unpredictable.

Publicly traded corporations' common share prices are even more volatile, driven by a lot of factors other than expectations of dividends and boards believe that investors prefer dividend rates to be less volatile and unpredictable.

In order to attenuate the inherent volatility, boards often announce plans for dividend rate and its growth. Although the plans are non-binding, corporations sometimes borrow money in order to pay dividends or otherwise use money that arguably might be spent better long term. In other words, people sometimes try hard to wipe out the information contained in share price and earnings time series.

So, what can you do, nevertheless, with a dividend rate time series? You could, for starters, see how well your model price, i.e. the present value of the indicated future dividends, explains the observed share price. Many others have looked at this, so you should have little trouble comparing your findings with published papers.

You could look at further inputs, such as industry, history of earnings, and history of debts, to characterize corporations that historically were better at making their dividends predictable, e.g. regulated utilities. You could try to predict which ones are likely to fail or succeed at this. You could even try to investigate how surprise changes in divident rates affect stock prices.

## Answer by Bob Jansen (score 3)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/75156

The Gordon Growth Model (GGM) is just a simple model. I don't imagine any serious user of the GGM believes in its assumptions or that calculating the true value of a stock is as simple as plugging in some numbers.

Your approach might indeed lead to better estimates as it uses more data than the GGM but past dividends alone are not enough to accurately value a stock. Disadvantages of your approach are that it's more complex and requires more data.

Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)

This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.