This 'Boring' Blue Chip Made Me 26% In A Year

Published in Company Comment on 3 February 2012

Sometimes, big is both beautiful and profitable!

One of the longest-running debates between investors is the 'big cap versus small cap' argument.

Dinosaurs don't run

Many investors, particularly in their early years of investing, are drawn to invest in small companies, largely because of their potential for strong growth. What's more, while it's certainly possible for a £10 million company to rise to become a £100 million firm, 'multi-bagging' doesn't often happen to blue-chip businesses.

Time and again, this argument is summarised as 'elephants don't gallop' or, as I prefer, 'dinosaurs don't run'. However, there is one powerful counter-argument: mega-cap dinosaurs rarely go bust, while the extinction rate for small businesses is dizzyingly high.

In nearly 25 years as an investor, I've made my very largest gains from solid blue chips. Alas, my biggest losses (all into six figures) have come from investing in small-cap companies worth under £50 million. Hence, I can easily see the attractions of the 'big is beautiful' brigade!

Big doesn't have to be boring

At present, I have no small-cap shares in my portfolio. What's more, I am a direct shareholder in only one FTSE 100 firm: pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (LSE: GSK). However, I do have exposure to the wider stock market through holdings in low-cost index-tracking funds.

As I write, GSK's share price is 1,404p, against its closing price of 1,171p on 4 February 2011. In other words, GSK's stock is up a fifth (20%) in a year, versus the Footsie's near-3% fall. What's more, GSK has a higher dividend yield than the wider market. Hence, it has delivered a total return of nearly 26% in the past 12 months. Not bad for a 'boring', long-established business, agreed?

Six lessons

My family and I have constantly owned shares in GSK since the late Eighties. Here are six reasons for keeping this core holding:

1. Buy what you know

Investment guru Warren Buffett argues that it makes sense to concentrate your portfolio by adding to your best holdings, rather than buying second-best. What's more, the Oracle of Omaha suggests that, to beat the market, your portfolio should contain no more than, say, 10 to 15 shares.

Buffett also urges investors to look for shares within their 'circle of competence'. With family ties to GSK going back decades, this is one company I know really well.

2. Invest for income

Investments that produce a steady, reliable income tend to be easier to value than those generating no cash, such as gold. For me, this income stream provides not only regular cash returns (in the form of quarterly GSK dividends), but also demonstrates the underlying financial strength of a business. Almost all FTSE 100 firms pay dividends, versus only a small proportion of small-cap firms.

3. Seek liquidity

Liquidity is a measure of how easy it is to buy into, and sell out of, an investment. Cash is the most liquid asset, as it can be used to pay for anything. On the other hand, a large commercial property is highly illiquid. Of course, most blue chips have near-perfect liquidity for small investors, whereas getting out of small-cap shares can be a nightmare, especially during market downturns.

4. 'Fortress' balance sheets

Businesses with weak balance sheets and poor cash flow live in constant peril of going bust. Hence, when seeking candidates to add to my watch list, I always look at a company's assets and liabilities and, in particular, its net debt.

While GSK had net debt of £9.5 billion as at 30 September 2011, this is easily manageable, being a mere 13% of the drug firm's market value of £71 billion. What's more, this rock-solid balance sheet allows GSK to borrow money cheaply and buy back tens of millions of its own shares each year.

5. Good dividend cover

As some of the UK's biggest businesses and brands, most British blue chips generate very strong cash flow, earnings and dividends. Even so, when looking at the future for a company's dividend, I always check its dividend cover, which is the earnings yield divided by the dividend yield.

Right now, GSK has a forecast earnings yield of 8.1% and a projected dividend yield of 4.9%. Thus, with dividend cover approaching 1.7, future cash payouts look safe -- for now, at least.

6. Buy on weakness

Lastly, if you're convinced of the merits of a business but Mr Market sends its share price tumbling, then this may indicate an uncoupling between the value of the business and the price of its shares. Often, these periodic market dislocations provide excellent buying opportunities for patient investors looking to increase their holdings of well-run businesses. For the record, I'd be happy to add to my holding in GSK at the current price.

Which side of the 'big cap versus small cap' debate do you take? Please tell us in the comments box below.

> Here's your free Essential Investor Kit. Over the next few weeks, you'll get share ideas, a sector report and much, much more. Don't miss out!

More from Cliff D'Arcy:

> Both Cliff and The Motley Fool own shares in GlaxoSmithKline.

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.

Hannibalis 03 Feb 2012 , 5:54pm

Good lessons.

GSK is a classic 'income' share. I sold one tranche recently with a near 30% capital gain @£13.76 - as you say, unusual for a FTSE 'elephant': Maybe sold too soon but greed overcame fear!

http://www.the-diy-income-investor.com/2011/11/portfolio-update-profit-taking-gsk-vod.html

hammerturk 03 Feb 2012 , 10:24pm

Also had a good run. Bought in 2009 at around 1080 and sold in December at 1440 as I thought this was the peak. Invested the money in BHP at 1835 so happy with my decision. Good company though so will buy again in the future when it drifts down again.

Curvedair 05 Feb 2012 , 11:05am

My grandfather bought this company's shares back in the 50s. He was a doctor so maybe he saw the potential in them ! Since then, my family have held these ever since. In fact I have some of his dividend tax credit slips with the figures hand written from the early 50s. They were called Glaxo Laborotories Ltd then.

The shares have done rather well since then, although less so recently. In the eighties I seem to remember they were doubling in value every three years for a while in the Zantac era. The dividend has never been cut though and I still think they are a core holding. In fact the family motto is probably don't sell the Glaxo !!

stupudfool 06 Feb 2012 , 6:21pm

"What's more, this rock-solid balance sheet allows GSK to borrow money cheaply and buy back tens of millions of its own shares each year."

I am not impressed with that strategy at all. I am a relative novice but that to me is highly questionable. AZN do it with free cash flow.

exbrat 06 Feb 2012 , 8:54pm

For many years I have looked for capital gain rather than income and my belief is that a share priced at 2.5p is far more likely to double in price than one at 250p. When they double I sell half, leaving me a free holding which, on several occasions, has doubled again I also derive simple pleasure from being able to tell my broker "I will buy half a million" rather than asking him to get me five thousand. Perhaps I am more of a gambler than an investor!

GoldenSoldier 06 Feb 2012 , 10:35pm

I have held GSK for a very long time and have added to it from time to time. I recently worked out my real return on the share price. It came to a real loss of 1.8% per year. I do have a small positive real return when I include dividends. I remain a holder, hoping that it will perform better in future.

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.