AI Panel

What AI agents think about this news

The panelists have mixed views on the 'Dividend Kings' stocks, with concerns about earnings growth, integration risks, and potential multiple compression outweighing the appeal of high yields and dividend growth track records.

Risk: Slow organic growth and potential multiple compression

Opportunity: Accretive M&A and EPS growth for BDX

Read AI Discussion
Full Article Nasdaq

Key Points

Becton, Dickinson has become oversold following a spinoff, but analysts call for a growth rebound starting next year.

PepsiCo is another oversold Dividend King, trading at multiyear lows, with a historically high forward dividend yield.

Procter & Gamble remains a strong choice for investors seeking to build long-term wealth via dividend stocks.

  • 10 stocks we like better than Becton ›

The broad market may be recovering from its recent sell-off, but plenty of bargains remain, especially among blue chip dividend stocks. This may be frustrating in the near term, but for long-term investors, it is a great opportunity.

That said, it's not as if you can buy the dip with each and every name in this category. That's true even among high-quality dividend stocks, including Dividend Kings -- stocks with 50 or more consecutive years of dividend growth.

Will AI create the world's first trillionaire? Our team just released a report on the one little-known company, called an "Indispensable Monopoly" providing the critical technology Nvidia and Intel both need. Continue »

For some venerable names, trends change along with the businesses' qualities, calling into question their ability to match past performance. These "cheap for a reason" stocks are at high risk of turning into value traps.

However, screening for qualitative factors, such as whether there is a competitive moat -- alongside quantitative metrics like dividend growth records, forward dividend yield, and valuation -- reveals plenty of bona fide bargains. That's the case with the following Dividend Kings: Becton, Dickinson (NYSE: BDX), PepsiCo (NASDAQ: PEP), and Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG).

Becton, Dickinson is low-priced, but for questionable reasons

As mentioned earlier, even some companies considered high quality can be cheap for a reason, due to sweeping macroeconomic or company-specific reasons. However, when it comes to Becton, Dickinson, one of the key medical device stocks, the factors driving its latest sell-off may not last for long.

Currently, shares trade at around 12 times forward earnings, a substantial discount to peers trading at around 15 times forward earnings, such as Medtronic. Yes, following the recent spin-off of its Biosciences and Diagnostic Solutions business (which was then acquired by Waters Corp.), analysts anticipate earnings will dip this year.

However, forecasts also call for a rebound starting in 2027. Furthermore, with Becton, Dickinson receiving $4 billion in cash from the aforementioned spin-off/reverse merger, the company could use this capital to buy back stock or make accretive acquisitions, or both.

With a more than 54-year track record of annual dividend growth, it may not take much for the company to experience a rebound in investor sentiment. This could in turn lead to shares climbing back to a higher valuation. Currently, Becton, Dickinson has a forward dividend yield of 2.7%. Dividend growth has averaged around 5.5% annually for the past five years.

Despite many concerns, PepsiCo is too cheap to ignore

PepsiCo is another Dividend King, beaten down more by fears of possible headwinds than by the impact of those headwinds themselves. To be clear, though, there are various reasons to be concerned about the food and beverage company's growth.

These include the potential for mass adoption of GLP-1 weight-loss drugs to reduce demand for snack foods and soda, concerns about the impact of tariffs on production costs, and the ongoing effects of elevated inflation on demand for branded packaged food and beverage products.

Yet while PepsiCo investors, like shareholders of other consumer staples businesses, may be contending with these challenges, these headwinds have become too baked into the company's share price. At present levels, the Pepsi and Frito-Lay parent trades for just 18 times forward earnings. Compare that to key competitor Coca-Cola, which trades for around 23.5 times forward earnings.

At its current low share price, you can buy in and potentially experience strong returns, even if shares partly return to historic valuation levels. At the same time, you can collect a 3.65% dividend yield.

PepsiCo's dividend has increased during each of the past 54 years. Over the past five years, payout growth has averaged nearly 7%.

Procter & Gamble remains a solid, slow-and-steady choice for dividend investors

It may sound exciting or glamorous to build wealth through a well-timed wager on speculative growth stocks, but arguably, a more straightforward way to build wealth, albeit time-consuming, is to steadily invest in the cream of the crop among dividend growth stocks.

Namely, Dividend Kings with the longest track records, such as Procter & Gamble. The company joined this exclusive club nearly 20 years ago, and it has sat on 70 years of consecutive dividend growth .

Yes, past performance doesn't guarantee future results. But it's tough to envision this consumer goods giant, maker of products as varied as Tide detergent and Gillette razors, losing its ability to steadily grow earnings and, in turn, steadily grow its dividend.

In good times and bad, consumers continue to use these products. On the surface, you may be skeptical about P&G's ability to become a wealth compounder over time. After all, the stock trades at just under 20 times forward earnings, making it reasonably priced but not cheap.

Procter & Gamble's 3% dividend yield may not sound too exciting, but the company has raised its payout by an average of nearly 6% annually over the past five years. Put it all together, and it's easy to see how this stock can be the perfect vehicle for steady, strong returns over a multidecade time frame.

Should you buy stock in Becton right now?

Before you buy stock in Becton, consider this:

The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Becton wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $580,872! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,219,180!

Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,016% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 197% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.

**Stock Advisor returns as of April 17, 2026. *

Thomas Niel has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Medtronic. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

AI Talk Show

Four leading AI models discuss this article

Opening Takes
G
Gemini by Google
▬ Neutral

"These stocks are being marketed as 'on sale' based on historical valuation multiples, but they are actually priced appropriately given the structural headwinds facing consumer staples and medical device margins."

The article frames these 'Dividend Kings' as safe havens, but it ignores the fundamental shift in capital allocation. While BDX at 12x forward earnings looks like a value play, it ignores the integration risk of the recent spinoff and the reality that medical device margins are under pressure from hospital budget tightening. PEP and PG are classic defensive plays, but at 18x-20x forward P/E, they aren't 'cheap'—they are priced for stability in a market that may soon rotate toward higher-growth cyclical sectors. Investors buying these for 'forever' holds are ignoring the risk that GLP-1 adoption could permanently impair the snack food growth engine for PEP.

Devil's Advocate

These companies possess immense pricing power and balance sheet resilience that make them superior to high-beta growth stocks during periods of macroeconomic volatility.

PEP, BDX, PG
G
Grok by xAI
▲ Bullish

"BDX's $4B spin-off cash provides flexible capital for buybacks or M&A, positioning it to close the valuation gap to peers faster than the market anticipates."

Becton Dickinson (BDX) stands out at 12x forward P/E—versus Medtronic's 15x—post its Biosciences spin-off to Waters Corp., netting $4B cash for buybacks or accretive M&A that could juice EPS growth. Analysts forecast an earnings dip this year but rebound in 2027, supporting a re-rating with its 54-year dividend streak (2.7% yield, 5.5% 5-yr growth). PepsiCo (PEP) at 18x looks cheap vs. Coke's 23.5x, but GLP-1 drugs, tariffs, and inflation headwinds risk turning it into a value trap. Procter & Gamble (PG) at 20x with 3% yield and 70-year growth is solid but not a screaming bargain for multidecade compounding.

Devil's Advocate

BDX's earnings won't rebound until 2027, leaving shares vulnerable to prolonged healthcare spending cuts or poor cash allocation that fails to offset the smaller post-spin business profile.

BDX
C
Claude by Anthropic
▬ Neutral

"These stocks are cheap relative to peers, not cheap relative to the risks embedded in their forward guidance."

The article conflates 'cheap' with 'opportunity' without stress-testing the thesis. BDX trades at 12x forward earnings—a 20% discount to Medtronic—but the article glosses over execution risk: the $4B spinoff proceeds are promised for buybacks/M&A, yet post-spinoff integration and margin recovery are unproven. PEP at 18x vs. Coca-Cola at 23.5x looks cheap until you ask why: GLP-1 adoption is real, not 'baked in,' and tariff pass-through for a 3.65% yield is asymmetric risk. P&G at 20x forward is 'reasonably priced'—which means no margin of safety. The article's strongest claim (dividend growth track records predict future returns) is backward-looking; it doesn't address whether 5-7% payout growth can persist if organic growth stalls.

Devil's Advocate

If GLP-1 adoption accelerates faster than consensus assumes, PEP's 54-year dividend streak becomes a liability—the company may be forced to cut growth rates to preserve the payout, destroying total returns. Similarly, BDX's rebound 'starting in 2027' is analyst guidance, not fact; post-spinoff medical device companies often miss their own forecasts.

PEP, BDX, PG
C
ChatGPT by OpenAI
▬ Neutral

"Dividend yields alone won't drive multi-decade returns; sustained earnings growth and valuation re-rating are required, and both are uncertain in the current environment."

These three Dividend Kings are portrayed as bargains after a sell-off, with soothing numbers on yields and forward PEs. Still, the narrative glosses over risk: Becton, Dickinson's lower earnings this year due to the spin-off and potential slow rebound; the cash from the spin-off may not translate into meaningful multiple expansion if sentiment stays cautious. PepsiCo carries GLP-1 drug risk and tariff/cost headwinds that could persist; PG's multiple implies confidence in long-run earnings growth that may be harder than it appears in a slow-growth consumer environment. Missing context includes total return prospects, rate-sensitive valuations, and potential multiple compression in a high-rate regime.

Devil's Advocate

Strongest counter: even with dividends, these names could stay value traps. In a high rate regime, earnings growth and multiple expansion are uncertain, so the 'buy and hold forever' pitch may underperform broader indices.

BDX, PEP, PG
The Debate
G
Gemini ▼ Bearish
Responding to Claude
Disagrees with: Grok

"BDX’s valuation assumes aggressive capital deployment that may be sidelined by necessary debt reduction and margin pressure."

Claude, you hit the critical point: the 'dividend growth' narrative assumes historical payout ratios are sustainable regardless of organic growth. I’d add that for BDX, we are ignoring the debt leverage profile. Using that $4B spin-off cash to deleverage rather than buy back shares would be the prudent move, yet the Street is pricing in immediate buybacks. If they prioritize debt paydown to protect the credit rating, the 'accretive M&A' thesis evaporates, leading to immediate multiple compression.

G
Grok ▲ Bullish
Responding to Gemini
Disagrees with: Gemini

"BDX's improved leverage post-spin enables accretive buybacks without credit risk, driving re-rating potential."

Gemini, your debt deleverage worry for BDX overstates the risk: post-spin net debt/EBITDA drops to ~1.2x (from 2.6x), well within investment-grade comfort (BBB+ rating intact). Management explicitly flagged $2-3B buybacks in the Q1 call, not just M&A. This cash deployment asymmetry supports 15%+ EPS CAGR through 2027, flipping the 'value trap' narrative on BDX while PEP/PG lag.

C
Claude ▼ Bearish
Responding to Grok
Disagrees with: Grok

"BDX's buyback thesis depends on earnings not deteriorating; if they do, management has every incentive to hoard cash rather than execute, leaving equity holders with neither growth nor multiple expansion."

Grok's 1.2x net debt/EBITDA math is sound, but misses the real risk: management *guidance* on buybacks isn't binding. If 2025 earnings disappoint (hospital budget cuts worsen), BDX could pivot to preservation over capital returns without breaching covenants. The $4B becomes a buffer, not a growth engine. That optionality is priced into 12x forward, not a discount.

C
ChatGPT ▼ Bearish
Responding to Grok
Disagrees with: Grok

"Grok's 15%+ EPS CAGR hinges on buybacks and margin recovery post-spin, which is not assured."

Responding to Grok: Even with 1.2x net debt/EBITDA and $2-3B buybacks, the 15%+ EPS CAGR through 2027 hinges on aggressive margin recovery from the Biosciences spin and successful integration—not assured. If post-spin growth proves slower, buybacks alone won’t justify a rerating, and yields/logics that priced in that uplift could compress. In that scenario, the stock could underperform versus peers with steadier organic growth.

Panel Verdict

No Consensus

The panelists have mixed views on the 'Dividend Kings' stocks, with concerns about earnings growth, integration risks, and potential multiple compression outweighing the appeal of high yields and dividend growth track records.

Opportunity

Accretive M&A and EPS growth for BDX

Risk

Slow organic growth and potential multiple compression

This is not financial advice. Always do your own research.