dividend-stocksbeginnersdividend-safetyvalue-investing
If you are new to dividend investing, the temptation is to chase the highest yield. That is exactly the wrong move. We screened the invest-like universe for stocks that pass at least 5 of 7 value-investing frameworks and carry an A or B dividend safety grade. Here are the 9 names that survived as of May 2026.
What is the best PE ratio for value investing? There is no universal answer, here's the worked-example proof
Every beginner asks what PE ratio counts as cheap. The honest answer is that there is no universal number. A PE of 15 in software is a screaming bargain. A PE of 15 in a utility is fairly priced. A PE of 15 in a coal miner is expensive. We walk through three sectors with worked examples.
Value investing in tech, is it an oxymoron? 5 tech names that pass the framework consensus today
For decades Buffett refused to buy tech. Then he bought Apple in 2016 and made over 100 billion in gains. Munger bought BABA. The lesson: tech is not the opposite of value investing if you know what to look for. Five tech names that pass the invest-like 7-framework screen today.
Tesla (TSLA) through 7 value-investing frameworks: where Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt agree (and disagree)
We ran Tesla through every value-investing framework on invest-like.com. Buffett scores 41/100, Graham 69, Fisher 34, Lynch 22, Greenblatt 3, Munger 33, T. Smith 39. Six of seven frameworks reject TSLA outright. The story under those scores is more interesting than the headline rejection.
If you are a beginner and you have just discovered the idea of dividend investing, the most common mistake is the highest-yield mistake. You sort the S and P 500 by dividend yield, you pick the top 10, you congratulate yourself for finding income. Six months later, three of them have cut their dividend and you are down 25 percent on the position.
This post is the opposite. We screened the invest-like 12,500-stock universe for two things at once: a sustainable dividend (A or B grade on our dividend safety scorer) AND broad agreement across the 7 value-investing frameworks (Buffett, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Greenblatt, Munger, Smith). Nine US-listed stocks survived as of May 2026.
These are the names a beginner can own without spending every quarter worrying about whether the dividend is about to be cut.
Three reasons dividends are not obsolete in an AI-stocks era:
1. Forced discipline on the company. A company that commits to paying a meaningful dividend must generate the cash, every quarter, to fund it. The dividend is a public commitment. CEOs who pay dividends are systematically more disciplined on capital allocation than CEOs of equivalent-quality companies that hoard cash. The exception is the rare compounder that genuinely reinvests at high incremental returns (Constellation Software, Berkshire). For most public companies, hoarded cash gets misallocated.
2. Total return contribution over multi-decade windows. Of the S and P 500's long-run nominal CAGR of roughly 10 percent, dividends contribute roughly 2 to 3 percentage points. That is a quarter to a third of the total return, and the dividend return is structurally more reliable than the price-appreciation return.
3. The reinvestment compounding loop. Dividends reinvested into more shares of the same company compound the position over decades. Over 30 years, a 3 percent yield with 2 percent annual dividend growth, reinvested, doubles your share count.
Dividends are not exciting. They also do not depend on the next CES keynote or the next earnings beat. They are the most boring, structurally sound source of investment return that exists.
Two filters applied simultaneously to the invest-like universe (more on each at /methodology/):
Filter 1: dividend safety grade A or B. This is invest-like's 4-letter dividend safety score (A through D) computed from payout ratio, FCF coverage of the dividend, debt to EBITDA, length of the dividend growth streak, and whether the company has cut its dividend in the prior 10 years. Methodology at /blog/dividend-safety-score-explained/.
Filter 2: at least 5 of 7 value-investing frameworks Strong Fit or Partial Fit at B-minus or better. The 7 frameworks are Buffett, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Greenblatt, Munger, and Smith. Full per-stock breakdown at /buffett/[ticker]/ and the cross-framework study at /blog/12500-stocks-7-frameworks-cross-framework-consensus/.
A stock has to pass both to make this list. Nine US-listed stocks did as of May 2026.
| Ticker | Company | Yield | Safety | Frameworks passed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JNJ | Johnson and Johnson | 3.2% | A | 6 of 7 |
| KO | Coca-Cola | 3.0% | A | 6 of 7 |
| PEP | PepsiCo | 3.6% | A | 6 of 7 |
| PG | Procter and Gamble | 2.6% | A | 6 of 7 |
| HD | Home Depot | 2.4% | A | 5 of 7 |
| MSCI | MSCI Inc | 1.2% | A | 7 of 7 |
| MA | Mastercard | 0.6% | A | 7 of 7 |
| LIN | Linde | 1.3% | A | 5 of 7 |
| ABBV | AbbVie | 3.6% | B | 5 of 7 |
Notice three things about the list.
The yields are modest, not eye-watering. The highest is AbbVie at 3.6 percent. The lowest is Mastercard at 0.6 percent. None of these are in the 6-percent-plus territory that attracts beginner yield-chasers. The reason is that all of these companies are high-quality and the market knows it; the price has bid up the share, which pushes the yield down.
Two of the nine are not classical dividend stocks. MSCI and Mastercard have yields below 1.5 percent. They pass the dividend safety screen because their payout ratios are tiny and the FCF coverage is enormous, not because the yield is high. They are dividend compounders, where the dividend itself is small but grows fast. Mastercard has grown its dividend at a 20 percent CAGR over the last 10 years. That kind of dividend growth, sustained, beats a static 5 percent yield in less than 10 years.
No utilities, no REITs. Utility stocks (XLU constituents) and REITs are the classic "highest dividend yield" cohort. They mostly fail the framework consensus screen because of leverage and weak growth. The classical dividend lists are heavy in utilities and REITs; this list is not, by design.
JNJ (Johnson and Johnson). Dividend Aristocrat (62 consecutive years of dividend growth as of 2026). Pharma plus medtech. The talc litigation has been a multi-year overhang but is largely behind the company. Yield 3.2 percent, 6 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/jnj/.
KO (Coca-Cola). 62 consecutive years of dividend growth. Iconic brand, global distribution, 65 percent of revenue outside the US. Yield 3.0 percent, 6 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/ko/. The most Buffett-style stock on this list.
PEP (PepsiCo). 53 consecutive years of dividend growth. Snacks (Frito-Lay) plus beverages, more diversified than KO. Slightly higher yield at 3.6 percent. 6 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/pep/.
PG (Procter and Gamble). 68 consecutive years of dividend growth. Multi-brand consumer staples. Yield 2.6 percent, 6 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/pg/.
HD (Home Depot). Not an Aristocrat by definition (only started paying dividend in 1987) but has grown the dividend every year since 2009. Yield 2.4 percent, 5 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/hd/. Sensitive to housing cycle; expect dividend growth to slow in housing downturns.
MSCI (MSCI Inc). Index and analytics provider. Capital-light, dominant in financial benchmarking. Yield is only 1.2 percent but dividend has grown at roughly 15 percent CAGR for 10 years. 7 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/msci/.
MA (Mastercard). Two-sided payments network. Yield is only 0.6 percent but the dividend growth rate is among the highest in the S and P 500 at roughly 20 percent CAGR. 7 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/ma/.
LIN (Linde). Industrial gases, the world's largest. Quasi-monopoly economics in many regions because of pipeline networks. Yield 1.3 percent, 5 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/lin/.
ABBV (AbbVie). Pharma giant, the spin-off from Abbott. Higher yield at 3.6 percent reflects market concerns about Humira loss-of-exclusivity, which is largely behind the company. B-grade safety (not A) because of higher leverage; 5 of 7 frameworks. /buffett/abbv/.
If you sorted the S and P 500 by raw dividend yield in May 2026, the top 20 would include several names with structural problems (legacy media, secular-decline tobacco companies, debt-heavy telecoms). High yield is often a market signal that the dividend is in danger.
The framework consensus filter is the protection. A stock that passes 5 of 7 independent value-investing frameworks is by construction not in secular decline (it would fail the Fisher test on growth), not over-levered (it would fail Graham on debt), and not in a moat-eroding category (it would fail Buffett). The intersection of "high yield" and "high quality" is small, and that is exactly the cohort beginners should buy.
A practical workflow for someone with 10,000 to 30,000 EUR to deploy into dividend stocks:
That is the entire workflow. There is no day trading. There is no monitoring of every Fed meeting. There is no chasing yield. There is buy-quality-with-yield, reinvest, hold.
Every stock above has a /buffett/[ticker]/ page with:
For the actively-maintained best-dividend list (re-screened weekly), see /best/dividend-safety/. The site-wide methodology is at /methodology/dividend-safety/.
Educational tool. The 9 stocks above pass our specific screens as of 26 May 2026. They are not investment recommendations. Past dividend growth does not predict future dividend safety. Dividend cuts happen even at high-quality companies (PG cut briefly in the 1930s; KO has not cut in 130+ years but is not legally guaranteed to continue). All stocks can lose value; dividend safety scores measure relative risk, not absolute risk.
Author: Zaid Ghazal, founder of invest-like, Kiel, Germany. Not a registered investment adviser. The dividend safety methodology has been independently published as a working paper at DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20393518.