As a child most of heard (or watched) Aesop’s fable The Tortoise and the Hare. The story is about confident hare that brags about how fast he can run while poking fun at a slow-moving tortoise. The tortoise having tired of the hare’s fodder challenges him to a race. The hare jumps out to an early lead and decides to take a nap midway through the race. When he awakes, he finds that the tortoise made steady progress and beat him to the finish line.

Have you ever stopped to ponder just where are all these get-rich-now infomercial millionaires? I know several people who have purchased one or more of these get-rich-now kits, but I don’t know of anyone who actually got rich from purchasing the kit. Warren Buffett and Bill Gates didn’t build their fortunes with a get-rich-now kit. They worked hard built it steadily over time.

In much the same way, a disciplined approach to investing, such as dividend growth stocks, can be highly effective. Though it may seem boring to many, I find it exciting to see my income growing as the finish line approaches. Consider these slow and steady growers:

There are really no shortcuts to long-term wealth. Many of those that win the lottery end up losing the money through mismanagement (or worse.) Dividend growth stocks may be slow, but they are also steady; and slow and steady wins the race.

Full Disclosure: Long WMT, PEP, SYY, CL, ITW, JNJ, KO, MMM, EMR, GPC, PG. See a list of all my income holdings here.

Related Posts
- Low-Debt Dividend Stocks
- Dividend Stocks Secret Ingredient
- Five High-Yield Positive Return Investments
- 7 Low-Debt High-Rated Dividend Stocks
- 8 Dividend Stocks With The Right Stuff

(Photo: Photo Credit)

Below is some background information on REITs from REIT.com:

Congress created REITs in the U.S. in 1960 as a way to make investment in large-scale, income-producing real estate accessible to all investors in the same way they typically invest otherwise – through the purchase and sale of liquid securities. U.S. REITs have seen their equity market capitalization soar from $90 billion to roughly $200 billion in just the past 10 years.

In order for a company to qualify as a REIT in the U.S., it must comply with certain ground rules specified in the Internal Revenue Code. These include: investing at least 75 percent of total assets in real estate; deriving at least 75 percent of gross income as rents from real property or interest from mortgages on real property; and distributing annually at least 90 percent of taxable income to shareholders in the form of dividends.

The 90% distribution requirement and no corporate taxes are the reasons REITs yields are often above average. However, it is important to note that because REITs pay no income tax, they are not eligible for the special treatment as a “qualified dividends”, which are normally taxed at 15%.  When comparing REIT yields to investments with qualified dividends, you must always  look at them on an after-tax basis.

Consider an example where a taxpayer with a federal marginal tax rate of 30% owns AT&T (T) with a yield of 6.56% and Universal Health Realty Income Trust (UHT) with a yield of  6.82%. On an after-tax basis T, which qualifies for the 15% tax rate, will yield 5.58%, while UHT will only yield 4.78%.

Like utilities, most REITs rely on new capital either in the form of debt or equity to fund investments, pay debt and pay dividends, albeit to a lesser extent. Consider the following:

Universal Health Realty Income Trust (UHT) – Yield: 6.82%
Shares Outstanding: 2000 9m; 2008 11m
Long-Term Debt: 1999 $75.2m; 2008 $32.7m
Years of Negative Free Cash Flow: 0 of 10

National Retail Properties, Inc. (NNN) – Yield: 6.76%
Shares Outstanding: 2000 30m; 2009 79m
Long-Term Debt: 1999 $101.7m; 2009 $0m ($961.1m in short-term)
Years of Negative Free Cash Flow: 5 of 10

HCP, Inc. (HCP) – Yield: 6.12%
Shares Outstanding: 2000 102m; 2009 274m
Long-Term Debt: 2000 $1,158.9m; 2009 $5,456.1m
Years of Negative Free Cash Flow: 5 of 10

Realty Income Corporation (O) – Yield: 6.00%
Shares Outstanding: 2000 53m; 2009 103m
Total Debt: 2000 $404m; 2009 $1,354.6m
Years of Negative Free Cash Flow: 7 of 10

Essex Property Trust (ESS) – Yield: 4.56%
Shares Outstanding: 2000 18m; 2009 29m
Long-Term Debt: 2000 $595.5m; 2009 $0.0m ($1,847.4m short-term)
Years of Negative Free Cash Flow: 6 of 10

Corporate Office Properties Trust, Inc. (OFC) – Yield: 4.07%
Shares Outstanding: 2000 25m; 2009 56m
Long-Term Debt: 2000 $193.7m; 2009 $0.0m ($2,053.8m short-term)
Years of Negative Free Cash Flow: 9 of 10

Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT) – Yield: 3.67%
Shares Outstanding: 2000 39m; 2009 59m
Long-Term Debt: 2000 $485.3m; 2009 $1,731.6m
Years of Negative Free Cash Flow: 2 of 10

Each of the above companies are growing their debt and/or shares outstanding, while not always generating sufficient cash to fund their operating expenses, including normal capital replacements (except for UHT). For a company to consistently raise its dividend, it must generate cash flows sufficient to meet operating obligations and to service outstanding debt. Since a REIT is legally required to pay out 90% of its earnings, it is less likely to eliminate its dividend, but it could drastically cut the dividend in the face of persistent weak earnings (like any company).

Similar to the utilities mentioned last week, I purchased some of the above companies many years ago, but I won’t be rushing to add to increase my positions.

Full Disclosure: Long T, NNN, HCP, O. See a list of all my income holdings here.

(Photo Credit)

As for my portfolio, I consider asset allocation only when looking at my holdings in total. It would be much too difficult to maintain a good allocation within individual portfolios (income, growth, 401(k), Roth IRA, etc.), while trying to maintain my overall allocation. However, an investor could build a degree of allocation into a portfolio of dividend income securities. Consider the following:

Business Services Sector

• Automatic Data Processing Inc. (ADP)
  Yield: 3.33% | Style: Large Growth | Analysis
• C H Robinson Worldwide Inc. (CHRW)
  Yield: 1.86% | Style: Large Growth
• Expeditors International of Washington Inc. (EXPD)
  Yield: 1.16% | Style: Mid Growth

Consumer Goods Sector

• Clorox Company (CLX)
  Yield: 3.23% | Style: Mid Core
• Coca-Cola Company (KO)
  Yield: 3.04% | Style: Large Growth | Analysis
• Procter & Gamble Company (PG)
  Yield: 2.85% | Style: Large Core | Analysis

Consumer Services Sector

• Genuine Parts Company (GPC)
  Yield: 4.19% | Style: Mid Value | Analysis
• Sysco Corporation (SYY)
  Yield: 3.56% | Style: Large Core | Analysis
• McDonald’s Corporation (MCD)
  Yield: 3.22% | Style: Large Core | Analysis

Energy Sector

• BP Plc ADR (BP)
  Yield: 6.15% | Style: Large Value
• Chevron Corporation (CVX)
  Yield: 3.75% | Style: Large Value
• ExxonMobil Corporation (XOM)
  Yield: 2.56% | Style: Large Value

Financial Services Sector

• Harleysville Group Inc. (HGIC)
  Yield: 3.90% | Style: Small Value | Analysis
• Chubb Corporation (CB)
  Yield: 2.85% | Style: Large Value | Analysis
• Aflac Inc. (AFL)
  Yield: 2.38% | Style: Large Core | Analysis

Hardware Sector

• Diebold Incorporated (DBD)
  Yield: 3.67% | Style: Small Value
• Linear Technology (LLTC)
  Yield: 3.23% | Style: Mid Core
• Raven Industries Inc. (RAVN)
  Yield: 1.90% | Style: Small Growth | Analysis

Health Care Sector

• Meridian Bioscience Inc. (VIVO)
  Yield: 3.27% | Style: Small Growth
• Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)
  Yield: 3.08% | Style: Large Core | Analysis
• Cardinal Health Inc. (CAH)
  Yield: 2.10% | Style: Large Core | Analysis

Industrial Materials Sector

• Nucor Corp. (NUE)
  Yield: 3.40% | Style: Large Core | Analysis
• Emerson Electric Co. (EMR)
  Yield: 2.90% | Style: Large Core | Analysis
• 3M Company (MMM)
  Yield: 2.58% | Style: Large Core

Media Sector

• McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. (MHP)
  Yield: 2.63% | Style: Large Core

Pharmaceuticals Sector

• Eli Lilly & Company (LLY)
  Yield: 5.77% | Style: Large Value
• Abbott Laboratories (ABT)
  Yield: 2.97% | Style: Large Growth | Analysis

Real Estate Sector

• Essex Property Trust (ESS)
  Yield: 5.14% | Style: Mid Core
• Corporate Office Properties Trust Inc. (OFC)
  Yield: 4.29% | Style: Mid Core
• Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT)
  Yield: 4.06% | Style: Mid Core

Telecommunications Sector

• CenturyLink Inc. (CTL)
  Yield: 8.10% | Style: Large Value
• AT&T Inc. (T)
  Yield: 6.54% | Style: Large Value | Analysis

Utilities Sector

• Integrys Energy Group Inc. (TEG)
  Yield: 6.61% | Style: Mid Value
• Consolidated Edison Company (ED)
  Yield: 5.59% | Style: Large Value
• MGE Energy Inc. (MGEE)
  Yield: 4.45% | Style: Small Core

Bonds

• Vanguard Short-Term Bond ETF (BSV)
  Yield: 2.74% | Style: Short-Term Bond
• Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond ETF (BIV)
  Yield: 4.32% | Style: Intermediate-Term Bond
• Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF (BLV)
  Yield: 5.16% | Style: Long-Term Bond

Needless to say, the above will not provide a perfect allocation, but it goes a long way to provide diversity in a portfolio focused only on income securities. In my personal portfolio, I buy the best available dividend securities and use my other investments to balance my asset allocation.

Full Disclosure: Long ABT, ADP, AFL, BIV, BLV, BP, CLX, CTL, CVX, ED, EMR, GPC, HGIC, JNJ, KO, LLY, MCD, MMM, NUE, PG, SYY, T, TEG. See a list of all my income holdings here.

(Photo Credit)

I have been using my new evaluation model now for about a month now. So far, I have been quite pleased with the results. It is helping me to efficiently review a lot of dividend stocks and identify those with strong financials, that are likely to continue increasing their dividends and that are fairly priced.  As I was developing and testing the new model I noticed it had a distinct dislike of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and utilities.

This got me to looking at these classes of stocks and asking the fundamental question, ‘Are they really quality dividend investments?’ Sure both are known to have above average yields, but as any knowledgeable dividend investor will tell you, current yield is just one small part of what makes up a great dividend stock.

I currently own three utilities and three REITs.  In addition to those, I follow three other utilities and three other REITs. Let’s take a look at some of them and determine if they are good dividend investments:

REITs
Health Care Property Investors Inc. (HCP) – 0 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 52%
Free Cash Flow Payout: 131%

Realty Income Corp (O) – 0 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 47%
Free Cash Flow Payout: -65%

Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT) – 2 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 51%
Free Cash Flow Payout: 101%

Kimco Realty Corporation (KIM) – 2 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 55%
Free Cash Flow Payout: -1753%

National Retail Properties, Inc. (NNN) – 4 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 39%
Free Cash Flow Payout: -144%

Utilities
SJW Corp. (SJW) – 0 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 49%
Free Cash Flow Payout: -94%

Progress Energy, Inc. (PGN) – 1 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 56%
Free Cash Flow Payout: -36%

Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) – 1 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 54%
Free Cash Flow Payout: 1045%

Black Hills Corp. (BKH) – 2 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 48%
Free Cash Flow Payout: -105%

Integrys Energy Group, Inc. (TEG) – 3 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 18%
Free Cash Flow Payout: -47%

Consolidated Edison, Inc. (ED) – 3 Stars
Debt to Total Capital: 52%
Free Cash Flow Payout: -40%

For a company to consistently raise its dividends, it must generate strong free cash flows sufficient enough to meet other obligations, such as debt, before paying a dividend. I look for a maximum of 45% Debt to Total Capital and a maximum of 60% Free Cash Flow Payout with the last 10 years positive.

With the exception of NNN and TEG, each of the above companies failed the Debt to Total Capital and Free Cash Flow Payout tests.  NNN and TEG passed the Debt to Total Capital test while failing the Free Cash Flow Payout test. All the above companies had multiple years of negative FCF over the last 10 years thus their dividends are supported via non-operating cash such as debt issuances and property sales. Ironically, NNN was the only 4 Star stock and it just recently froze its dividend.

Most REITs and utilities may provide your income portfolio with an additional boost in yield, but may end up costing you more in the long run. I will continue to look at REITs and utilities, but they must measure up like any other stock.

Full Disclosure: Long HCP, O, NNN, PGN, TEG, ED. See a list of all my income holdings here.

Linked here is a detailed quantitative analysis of Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT). Below are some highlights from the above linked analysis:

Company Description: Federal Realty Investment Trust is an equity real estate investment trust that specializes in the ownership, management and redevelopment of community and neighborhood shopping centers.

Fair Value: I consider 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

FRT is trading at a discount to 1.), 2.) and 3.) above. If I exclude the high and low valuations and average the remaining two, FRT is trading at a 18.2% discount. FRT earned a Star in this section since it is trading at a fair value.

Dividend Analytical Data: In this section I consider five factors, see page 2 of the linked PDF for a detailed description:

1. Rolling 4-yr Div. > 15%
2. Dividend Growth Rate
3. Years of Div. Growth
4. 1-Yr. > 5-Yr Growth
5. Payout 15% of avg.

FRT earned one Star in this section for 3.) above. FRT has paid a cash dividend to shareholders every year since 1962 and has increased its dividend payments for 41 consecutive years. Last year’s dividend payout was 114%, up from 92% in 2007. Since the increase was in excess of 15 points, a Star is deducted, leaving a net of zero Stars in this section. The payout ratio is high because U.S. REITs are required to distribute at least 90% of their taxable income to their shareholders under §857 of the Internal Revenue Code.

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)? 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

FRT earned both of the available Stars in this section. The NPV MMA Diff. of the $10,693 is in excess of the $2,500 minimum I look for in a stock that has increased dividends as long as FRT has. FRT’s current yield of 5.95% exceeds the 3.39% estimated 20-year average MMA rate.

Other: FRT is a member of the Broad Dividend Achievers™ Index. FRT should continue to see healthy operating results and benefit from its geographic, customer and property-type diversity. As an owner of shopping centers in relatively affluent metropolitan markets, FRT’s position is somehat protected with barriers to entry. FRT should see solid growth from planning and managing its mixed-use communities. Risks include declining retail expansion, condominium sales and an interest rate increase.

Conclusion: FRT earned one Star in the Fair Value section, did not earn any Stars in the Dividend Analytical Data section and earned two Stars in the Dividend Income vs. MMA section for a net total of three Stars. This quantitatively ranks FRT as a 3 Star-Hold.

Using my D4L-PreScreen.xls model, I determined the share price could increase to $67.93 before FRT’s NPV MMA Differential fell to the $3,000 that I like to see. At that price the stock would yield 3.83%.

Resetting the D4L-PreScreen.xls model and solving for the dividend growth rate needed to generate the needed $3,000 NPV MMA Differential, the calculated rate is -3.7%. This negative dividend growth rate is well below the 3.2% used in this analysis, thus providing a margin of safety. FRT has a risk rating of 1.75 which classifies it as a medium risk stock.

FRT is an interesting stock. I am impressed with its long string of dividend increases and seven consecutive years of positive free cash flow. Most REITs tend to generate negative free cash flow  in a number of years. However, its debt to equity of 51% is a little higher than I like to see. Although FRT is trading below my buy price of $53.47, my real estate allocation is well covered at this time. For additional information, including the stock’s dividend history, please refer to its data page.

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 held no position in FRT (0.0% of my Income Portfolio).

What are your thoughts on FRT?

Quantitative Stock Analysis: Updated: 3-28-2009
FRT-Analysis.PDF

Share Data:

Click here for full page view.
Click the Dividends tab above to see historical dividend information.

Comments: Updated: 3-28-2009
FRT should continue to see healthy operating results and benefit from its geographic, customer and property-type diversity. As an owner of shopping centers in relatively affluent metropolitan markets, FRT’s position is somehat protected with barriers to entry. FRT should see solid growth from planning and managing its mixed-use communities. Risks include declining retail expansion, condominium sales and an interest rate increase.

Other Resources:
Relevant Articles
Morningstar Financial Statements
Yahoo Finance
Google Finance
MSN Recent News