Dividend Report Card: Marks & Spencer

Published in Company Comment on 22 July 2010

Does this share's dividend pass the grade?

All dividends are not created equal.

We learned this lesson the hard way in recent years. In 2009 alone, 202 UK companies cut their dividend, whilst another 60 froze their payouts. Because dividends are at the board of directors' discretion, when times get tough a firm's dividend payout can meet the corporate chopping block.

Avoiding the executioner

Certainly things have gotten better since those dark days, but with many concerns remaining about the global economy, investors would be wise to ask the following three questions of their companies' dividends:

1. Over time, has this company steadily increased its payouts?

2. How sustainable is the dividend?

3. Does the company have room to further increase the dividend?

To help you out, I've created a proprietary dividend report card that seeks to answer these questions by analyzing a company's financial statements. It's not intended to be a Magic Eight-Ball, but it will hopefully get you pointed in the right direction.

Today's pupil is Marks & Spencer (LSE: MKS), which is currently yielding 4.4%.

Dividend history

Income-minded investors prefer a good track record of rising dividend payouts. Not only is it a sign that management is dedicated to returning shareholder value, but also that the board of directors expects future profitability.

Let's see how well Marks & Spencer has increased its dividend over the past five years, relative to its earnings growth:

Metric5 Year
Annualized
Growth Rate
Dividend per share4.4%
Diluted earnings per share13.7%

Data provided by Capital IQ, as of 21 July, 2010.

Marks & Spencer's 2009 dividend cut obviously set them back in this category, but even with the cut, the dividend per share has increased at a fair rate since 2005.

Past returns don't guarantee future results, however, so dividend history is only 10% of the final grade. That said, for this category, Marks & Spencer scores a 2 of 5.

Sustainability

Finding companies with solid financial footing, backed by a strong balance sheet, sufficient profitability, and plenty of free cash flow is at the root of successful dividend investing. There's no point buying a share yielding 5% if you don't believe the dividend is sustainable. For this reason, sustainability gets a 50% weighting in my formula.

To analyse dividend sustainability, I look at three factors:

1. Interest coverage ratio (operating profits / interest costs)

2. Earnings dividend payout ratio (dividend per share / earnings per share).

3. Free cash flow dividend payout ratio (Dividends paid / Free cash flow to equity).

It's worth noting that in my definition of free cash flow to equity, I also back out any acquisitions the company's made over the past 12 months. Hey, that's cash that could have been paid out as a dividend! Plus, serial acquirers may cut a dividend to help fund a new acquisition, so we want to be sure there's still plenty of cash to go around after all investments have been made.

For Marks & Spencer, the results are:

MetricTrailing
12 Months
Final
Grade
Weighting
Report Card
Score
(out of 5)
Interest coverage6.210%4
EPS payout ratio44.8%10%5
FCFE payout ratio41.9%30%5

Data provided by Capital IQ, as of 21 July, 2010.

Marks & Spencer's current dividend level appears to be well covered by both earnings and free cash flow and its balance sheet has also improved modestly from where it stood in early 2009. All of these factors suggest that the current dividend is at least sustainable and that another dividend cut does not seem to be on the horizon.

Growth

Once you know that a dividend is sustainable, you'll want to see how much room the company has to raise its payout. It may not be quite as important as dividend sustainability, but it's still an essential factor for income-minded investors who want their payouts to increase at rates well above inflation.

For this reason, growth makes up the last 40% of the final grade.

In this section, I once again use the earnings and free cash flow payout ratios. Only this time I'm not just looking to see if there's more than enough profits and cash to sustain the dividend. I want to see how much the payout can grow, so the lower the payout ratios, the better.

I also consider a firm's implied sustainable growth rate, defined as return on equity times its retention ratio (the percentage of profits it keeps to reinvest in the business). This is the highest achievable growth rate the company can have without changing its capital structure.

Here's how Marks & Spencer scored on these metrics:

MetricTrailing
12 Months
Final
Grade
Weighting
Report Card
Score
(out of 5)
EPS payout ratio44.8%10%4
FCFE payout ratio41.9%20%4
Sustainable growth rate13.7%10%5

Coming off a tumultuous two-year period for the company, I wouldn't expect dividend growth to immediately resume at a torrid pace, but there's plenty of potential for Marks & Spencer to resume steady payout growth in the coming years.

Bonus factor

An "ungraded" section of the dividend report card is to see how a stock's current yield stacks up against direct competitors'. If it's too high relative to competitors' yields, the board could be tempted to slow the growth rate, or vice versa, to bring it more in line with the industry average.

CompanyDividend Yield
Tesco (LSE: TSCO)3.3%
Wm. Morrison (LSE: MRW)2.9%
Sainsbury (LSE: SBRY)4.1%

All of the major British supermarket shares post healthy yields, so Marks & Spencer's 4.4% yield isn't out of the ordinary. Still, as the highest yielder in the group, the company may have less motivation to increase its payouts at an above-average rate without a concurrent boost to its share price.

Pencils down!

With all the numbers in, here's how Marks & Spencer's dividend scored:

WeightingCategoryFinal Grade
10%History2
10%Balance sheet4
10%Income statement5
30%Free cash flow5
10%Income statement4
20%Cash flow4
10%Sustainable growth5
100%Total Score (out of 5)4.3
 Final GradeA-

Marks & Spencer's sharp dividend cut in 2009 may have left some income-minded investors with a bad taste in their mouth -- once bitten, twice shy, after all -- but the current dividend looks rather healthy.

More from Todd Wenning:

> Fool analyst Todd Wenning does not own shares of any company mentioned.

Coming soon: The Motley Fool will be launching a brand new service focussed on dividend investing. Register your interest and you'll be the first to find out the full details.

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

guykguard 27 Jul 2010 , 2:02pm

Just in case you read this a week later, I really like your articles: they stand out for their technical standard -- from the Stern School, at a guess? (I taught this stuff for about 20 years!)
If I may risk being pedantic, I just feel it's a shame -- a slip of the keyboard, perhaps? -- that you align dividend policy with shareholder value when, as Alfred Rappaport pointed out in his books, it is mainly a key factor in determining shareholder return.
Shareholder value and shareholder return are not at all the same thing, although "not many people know that", so they are invariably confused.

XMFPhila100 27 Jul 2010 , 4:23pm

Hi guykguard,

It's a fair point you bring up. Rappaport believed that successful business operations is what created shareholder *value*, which could then be *returned* to shareholders via capital gains and dividends.

I would argue, however, that a good dividend policy can actually improve business operations because it reduces the risk of, among other things, "empire building" by management (i.e., poor acquisitions, growing too quickly, etc.).

In fact, a 2002 study done by Clifford Asness and Robert Arnott found that the higher a company's payout ratio, the higher the expected growth rate in earnings and vice versa (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=390143).

I certainly see Rappaport's point and I don't necessarily refute it, but I think dividends can be both shareholder return and a driver of shareholder value.

I wasn't educated at Stern (NYU) :), but the Fool has a close relationship with the Stern school and I've worked with Professor Damodaran in the past. For anyone out there who hasn't read Damodaran's valuation books, they're essential reading for investors: http://amzn.to/dqbNQM

Thanks again for your post.

Foolish best,

Todd Wenning

guykguard 28 Jul 2010 , 2:49pm

Hello Todd:
Don't mention it!
We don't need to rehearse the dividend policy debate out here, but it's always nice to find a journalist's sources -- pp 577-578 of my ancient but well-thumbed copy of AD's Corp Finance :).
Talking of sources, I got nowhere with your first link, which has moved. Pity: I like to keep up with some of this stuff, even in relaxed retirement!
Keep up the good work, please.

XMFPhila100 28 Jul 2010 , 5:02pm

Hi guykguard,

Will do. If you type in "Asness Arnott" and the title of their study "Surprise! Higher Dividends = Higher Earnings Growth" you'll get a link to their abstract.

Foolish best,

Todd

serengetty 31 Jul 2010 , 9:52am

I like these dividend report card articles! Keep up the good work.
http://www.ftsedividend.com gives an overview of the highest FTSE 350 dividends. Note that this of course doesn't say anything about sustainability.

Best,

mcturra2000 16 Aug 2010 , 12:58pm

@TMFPhila The paper you mentioned can be found here:
http://tinyurl.com/3yoouv9

I've got some bad news: according to some stats I downloaded, the median dividend cover of the Footsie is about 2.4, giving a payout ratio of 0.42 (the inverse). This is very low historically. According to their statistics, we would predict an estimated average annual earnings growth of about -1% (i.e. negative) for the decade ahead.

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.