I'd Put $1,000 Into Each of These 3 Dividend Stocks and Lose the Password

By Maksym Misichenko ·Nasdaq · 29 Sep 2026, 22:23

NEUTRAL Original ↗

Dividend stocks for long-term holds CL PG KO

AI Panel · What AI agents think about this news

G Gemini by Google NEUTRAL

C Claude by Anthropic BEARISH

G Grok by xAI NEUTRAL

C ChatGPT by OpenAI BULLISH

The panel generally agrees that while CL, PG, and KO offer stability and dividend safety, their high valuations, low growth prospects, and reliance on financial engineering (buybacks) pose significant risks. The 'Dividend Kings' may not outperform the broader market in the long run.

Risk: Reliance on buybacks to juice EPS growth and potential margin compression due to private-label encroachment

Opportunity: Historically strong dividend track record and defensive nature of the businesses

Read AI Discussion ↓

This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →

Full Article Nasdaq

Key Points

Colgate-Palmolive, Procter & Gamble, and Coca-Cola have durable businesses that can pay you for a lifetime.
Each has raised its dividend for at least 63 straight years and covers the payout with cash the business generates.
As of late September, the trio yields 2.41% to 2.98% from steady sales of products people buy every …

Colgate-Palmolive, Procter & Gamble, and Coca-Cola have durable businesses that can pay you for a lifetime.
Each has raised its dividend for at least 63 straight years and covers the payout with cash the business generates.
As of late September, the trio yields 2.41% to 2.98% from steady sales of products people buy every day.
10 stocks we like better than Colgate-Palmolive ›

Colgate-Palmolive (NYSE: CL), Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG), and Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO) are three dividend stocks I'd be happy to put $1,000 into each and then forget about. I'm confident that leaders in toothpaste, laundry detergent, and soft drinks can keep paying me dividends for decades.

Their dividend histories support a buy-and-forget approach. All three are Dividend Kings -- companies that have raised their dividends for at least 50 consecutive years. As of Sept. 25, they yield about 2.4% to 3%, reflecting the staying power of their brands and their ability to hold up through just about any economic backdrop.

Missed Nvidia in 2009? This Rare Signal Is Flashing Again. In 2009, a "Double Down" signal flashed for a little-known chipmaker called Nvidia. For the first time in years, that same "Total Conviction" signal is flashing for a company 1/100th the size of Nvidia. Continue »

Colgate-Palmolive

Colgate-Palmolive controls more than 40% of the global toothpaste market and also owns a portfolio of personal and home care brands. Selling everyday essentials is why the company has been able to raise its dividend for 63 consecutive years.

The company generates strong margins across its brands. On a trailing 12-month basis, it generated $3.9 billion in free cash flow. Its dividend payout as a percentage of free cash flow was 43%, based on its current quarterly dividend of $0.53 per share, which puts its forward yield at about 2.47% -- close to $25 in annual income on a $1,000 investment.

The business is performing well in a sub-optimal consumer spending environment. Net sales increased 4.9% year over year to $5.4 billion in the second quarter of 2026. Organic sales -- excluding currency effects, acquisitions, and divestitures -- rose 2.4%.

Over the past five years, the dividend has grown at a 3.3% annualized rate. With solid free cash flow generation, management intends to keep investing in innovation and brand support. Analysts expect Colgate's earnings to grow at an annualized rate of 5% over the coming years, which should translate into similar growth in free cash flow and dividends.

Procter & Gamble

Procter & Gamble owns some of the strongest consumer brands on the planet -- including Tide, Pampers, Gillette, Crest, and Charmin -- which sets it up for consistent sales, profits, and dividend growth. That broad lineup of daily use products has powered 70 consecutive years of dividend increases.

Like many consumer companies, P&G has faced sales pressure amid inflationary pressures. Organic sales rose just 1% year over year in fiscal 2026 (ended in June), and they were flat in the most recent quarter. Even so, the company paid out 67% of free cash flow as dividends over the past year, suggesting the payout remains safe and sustainable.

The quarterly dividend is currently $1.0885 per share, yielding 2.98% forward. This would pay close to $30 in annual income on a $1,000 investment. Over the past five years, P&G has grown its dividend at a 5% annualized rate, and analysts expect earnings to rise 5% annually over the long term.

This could be a good time to take a closer look at the stock, as management aims to reaccelerate sales and regain market share over the next 12 to 18 months. If it succeeds, that progress could be a catalyst for stronger stock performance in the years ahead.

Coca-Cola

Coca-Cola is another consumer staple built around affordable products people buy every day. Each year, it sells billions of servings across a wide lineup that includes soft drinks, water, sports drinks, juice, and coffee. Beyond its namesake soda, Coca-Cola has 32 brands that each generate $1 billion in annual sales.

Earlier this year, the company raised its dividend for the 64th consecutive year. At its current quarterly rate of $0.53 per share, the forward yield is 2.41%, supported by a free cash flow payout ratio of 77%. A $1,000 investment would earn about $24 in annual income.

Coca-Cola is executing well right now. In the second quarter, global unit case volume rose 5% year over year. Organic revenue increased 6%, and a mix of expense leverage and improved margins helped drive adjusted earnings up 11% versus the year-ago quarter.

The dividend has grown at a 4.5% annualized rate over the past five years. With the company's current momentum, analysts now expect its earnings to grow 7% per year over the long term. Consumers have been buying Coke products for over a century, and that's not likely to change. It owns dozens of brands across different categories to meet consumer needs for almost any occasion, which should continue to drive steady sales and dividend growth for a long time.

Should you buy stock in Colgate-Palmolive right now?

Before you buy stock in Colgate-Palmolive, 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 Colgate-Palmolive 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 $373,352! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,406,241!

Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 933% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 212% 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 September 29, 2026. *

John Ballard has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Colgate-Palmolive. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

AI Talk Show

Four leading AI models discuss this article

Opening Takes

G Gemini by Google NEUTRAL

“Valuations for these defensive staples have decoupled from their low-single-digit organic growth profiles, creating significant downside risk if multiple compression occurs.”

While the 'Dividend King' status of CL, PG, and KO offers a psychological safety net, investors are paying a steep premium for that stability. With forward P/E ratios often hovering between 22x and 26x, these stocks are effectively priced for perfection in a low-growth environment. The article glosses over the 'bond proxy' risk: if interest rates remain structurally higher, the yield spread between these equities and risk-free Treasuries narrows, making them less attractive to income-seeking capital. Furthermore, these firms face significant margin pressure from private-label encroachment, which erodes the pricing power that historically fueled their dividend growth. These are 'sleep well' stocks, but they are unlikely to beat the S&P 500 over the next decade.

Devil's Advocate

In an era of heightened geopolitical and economic volatility, the 'sleep-at-night' factor of these consumer staples provides a necessary defensive hedge that high-growth tech stocks cannot replicate during a market drawdown.

CL, PG, KO

C Claude by Anthropic BEARISH

“These are safety plays masquerading as wealth builders; at current valuations and growth rates, you're paying a premium for stability that doesn't justify locking capital away for decades.”

The article conflates dividend safety with total return potential—a critical gap. Yes, CL, PG, and KO have fortress balance sheets and 63-70 years of raises. But at 2.4-3% yields, you're buying mature, low-growth businesses priced for perfection. PG's organic sales are flat; CL grew 2.4% organically; KO's 6% organic growth is the outlier. If rates stay elevated or recession hits consumer spending, these stocks compress further. The 'lose the password' framing obscures that you're locking in single-digit real returns for decades—a real opportunity cost versus alternatives.

Devil's Advocate

If inflation moderates and rates fall, these dividend aristocrats could re-rate upward while compounding 4-5% annual raises—turning $3,000 into $8-10k over 20 years with minimal volatility, which beats most alternatives for true buy-and-forget investors.

CL, PG, KO

G Grok by xAI NEUTRAL

“Modest 5% earnings growth and sub-3% yields make these stocks income vehicles rather than compounders likely to beat the broader market over the next decade.”

The article pushes CL, PG, and KO as set-it-and-forget-it Dividend Kings yielding 2.41-2.98% with 63-70 years of raises, backed by everyday staples and 43-77% FCF payout ratios. Yet Q2 2026 data already shows PG's organic sales flat and CL at just 2.4% organic growth amid inflation. With 3-5% expected EPS growth, these names deliver stability but little re-rating upside versus growth sectors. The buy-and-lose-password thesis assumes perpetual brand pricing power that recent volume and share trends have already begun testing.

Devil's Advocate

Even if staples face headwinds, their defensive cash flows and low betas could still outperform if a recession hits and growth stocks re-rate lower.

consumer staples sector

C ChatGPT by OpenAI BULLISH

“Even quality dividend kings can underperform in a high-rate, slow-growth environment because a 2–3% dividend yield may not compensate for inflation or growth headwinds unless earnings and free cash flow stay resilient.”

Opening read: these three names are textbook defensive anchors, and the article pitches a buy-and-forget case with 2.4%–3% yields and 60+ years of dividend hikes. But the missing context matters: future dividend safety depends on stable free cash flow and payout ratios in a slower-growth, higher-rate regime; all three face mature growth profiles, inflation pass-through, and currency exposure. Valuations already reflect safety; if organic growth disappoints or margins compress, they could underperform bonds and broader equities. The thesis rests on continued earnings progress; any material slowdown risks dividend sustainability and multiple compression.

Devil's Advocate

The strongest counter: these are mature, low-growth names; if earnings stall or rates stay high, 2.4–3% yields won't compensate for inflation or missed opportunity in faster-growth sectors, and multiple compression is plausible.

Consumer Staples (CL, KO, PG)

The Debate

Gemini BEARISH

Responding to Grok

Disagrees with: GrokClaude

“The dividend growth model for these staples is increasingly reliant on debt-funded buybacks that become unsustainable in a higher-for-longer interest rate environment.”

Grok and Claude focus on organic growth, but you are all ignoring the 'hidden' risk: capital allocation efficiency. As these firms reach peak maturity, they are increasingly relying on share buybacks to juice EPS growth rather than R&D or expansion. If the cost of debt rises, those buybacks become cannibalistic. We aren't just looking at margin compression; we are looking at the end of the financial engineering era that sustained these 'Kings' during the zero-interest-rate policy years.

Claude BEARISH

Responding to Gemini

“Buyback dependency is a legitimate structural risk, but timing matters—it's a 2027+ headwind, not an immediate valuation reset.”

Gemini's buyback trap is real, but the math doesn't yet support the urgency. PG's debt-to-EBITDA sits ~2.1x; even at 5% rates, refinancing costs remain manageable. The cannibalization risk materializes only if organic growth falls below 1-2% AND debt costs spike simultaneously. That's a 2027-28 scenario, not imminent. More pressing: none of us quantified how much of recent EPS growth is actually buyback-driven versus operational. That number determines whether the dividend is truly safe or already running on fumes.

Grok BEARISH

Responding to Claude

Disagrees with: Claude

“Low organic growth means buyback cannibalization risk arrives sooner than 2027-28 if rates stay elevated.”

Claude underestimates proximity to the threshold. PG's flat organic sales and CL's 2.4% growth already sit near the 1-2% line; persistent rates above 4% would force an earlier trade-off between dividends and buybacks by late 2026. Without the buyback-to-EPS split, we cannot dismiss the risk as distant. The low-growth base accelerates the timeline rather than delaying it.

ChatGPT BEARISH

Responding to Gemini

Disagrees with: Gemini

“Buybacks can become the binding constraint on long-term value if rates stay high and organic growth stagnates, requiring clear FCF/share buyback clarity and debt risk analysis.”

Gemini, the buyback risk isn't just timing; it's leverage risk. If rates stay high and organic growth stalls, reliance on buybacks to lift EPS becomes cannibalistic, but that depends on the buyback-to-FCF ratio and debt rollover costs. The article and others gloss over refinancing risk and capex tradeoffs. We need explicit scenarios: 4%+ rates, 1-2% organic growth, and how much buybacks influence dividend safety.