Dividends: why our quality method does not evaluate them (and what that reveals)
2026-06-22 · By Lubin Danilo, founder of Lubin Investment
Our method contains no dividend criteria because a dividend measures the use of cash, not its creation. A company distributing a 5% yield but generating little free cash flow is structurally weaker than one that pays nothing but compounds its cash at 15% per year. We evaluate the source, not the tap.
- Zero dividend criteria in our screener: we neither reward nor penalize dividend payments.
- A dividend is a use of cash, not a generator of cash — this is a fundamental distinction.
- Some of our highest-rated companies do pay dividends (Mastercard, Progressive, Kinsale) — but those dividends are tiny relative to their free cash flow.
- High-yield but low free-cash-flow-margin companies (utilities, REITs, telecoms) frequently fail our quality assessment.
- A high dividend can mask a structurally weak business: that is exactly the warning signal the Lubin method catches.
The paradox: no dividend criteria, yet some top-rated companies pay them
When people first encounter our evaluation method, the surprise is usually the same: there is no dividend-related criterion anywhere. And yet companies like Mastercard, Progressive, and Kinsale Capital come out with maximum scores — and all three pay a dividend. The answer lies in the distinction between distributing cash and generating cash. Our method measures exclusively the latter.
A dividend is a use of cash, not a source of value
Consider two companies. The first generates an 8% free cash flow margin and returns 5% of its stock price as a dividend. The second pays nothing, but generates a 35% free cash flow margin and reinvests that cash into profitable acquisitions and buybacks. In ten years, the second almost always creates more shareholder value.
Yield investor vs Lubin method: two readings of the same balance sheet
| Criterion | Yield investor | Lubin method |
|---|---|---|
| What it measures | Distributed income stream | Ability to generate cash |
| Central indicator | Dividend yield (%) | Free cash flow margin (%) |
| View of high dividend yield | Positive signal | Potentially negative signal |
| View of zero dividend | Penalizing | Neutral or positive |
| Examples favored | Realty Income (O), AT&T (T) | Mastercard (MA), Kinsale Capital (KNSL) |
Three concrete examples
Mastercard pays a dividend with a yield of roughly 0.6%. That is tiny. But its free cash flow margin exceeds 45%, and the vast majority of that cash is reinvested or returned through buybacks. The dividend is incidental — the cash-generating machine is extraordinary.
AT&T for years displayed one of the highest yields in the US market. But beneath that generous dividend sat a balance sheet loaded with debt, a free cash flow margin under chronic pressure, and near-zero growth. The Lubin method rejects AT&T because of its fundamentals — which also explain why the dividend was ultimately cut.
What dividends still reveal
A well-funded dividend — covered several times over by free cash flow — reflects disciplined management and abundant cash generation. A dividend that represents 80 to 100% of available free cash flow is a warning: the company is distributing everything it earns, with no safety margin.
FAQ
Why does the Lubin method not take dividends into account?
Because a dividend measures cash distribution, not cash generation. A company can pay a high dividend and still be structurally fragile.
Can a dividend-paying company still score well?
Yes, absolutely. Mastercard, Progressive, and Kinsale Capital all pay dividends and all earn maximum scores. What matters is that the dividend is comfortably covered by free cash flow.
Is a high yield a warning sign?
Not automatically, but often. Our method catches this risk through structural quality indicators, well before the market reacts.
Is the Lubin method suited to investors who need regular income?
Our method is designed to identify companies that create value over the long term, not to maximize immediate income.
How do you tell whether a dividend is sustainable?
The most useful ratio is the free cash flow payout ratio. Below 50%, the dividend is generally very safe. Above 100%, the company is borrowing to pay shareholders — that is not sustainable.
Analyser une action sur Lubin Investment
About the author
Written by Lubin Danilo, founder of Lubin Investment. A self-taught individual investor, I have analyzed stocks through their fundamentals for several years and invest my own money with this method. I codified it into a tool that judges a company's quality and its price separately, using criteria drawn from the financial literature (Warren Buffett, Michael Mauboussin, Aswath Damodaran).