Citywire for Financial Professionals
Stay connected:

Citywire printed articles sponsored by:


View the video online at http://citywire.co.uk/money/video/a565692

GlaxoSmithKline: why I like this 'big and boring' share

As a newbie share buyer GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L) is my kind of stock.

GlaxoSmithKline: why I like this 'big and boring' share

I return to the topic of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L) following its 2011 results and because I am thinking of buying it for the £10,000 portfolio based on Citywire Top Stocks®.

Some think this focus on big, blue chips is a bit boring, but I think GlaxoSmithKline's reliability is part of its attraction.

GlaxoSmithKline has been a member of Citywire Top Stocks® since we launched it last September. It is held by four of the five fund managers on our panel. My first video on it is here.

For more information visit the Citywire Top Stocks® page.

It’s been four months since I started Stock of the Week.

To mark this momentous occasion I’m going to have another look at GlaxoSmithKline, the drugs giant with which I began the series.

The reason for revisiting Glaxo is the company’s annual results this week which have renewed debate over the pros and cons of it as a stock for investors.

I’m taking a particularly close interest in this debate because I’m about to start investing £10,000 Citywire has given me to run a portfolio of Citywire Top Stocks®.

I’m thinking I might make Glaxo my first investment as it remains the most popular Top Stock, held by four of the five fund managers on our panel.

Four out of five top stock pickers can’t be wrong, can they?

Well, I’ve discovered that my choice of first stock doesn’t impress some Citywire Money readers, who found it mind-numbingly tedious.

That’s fair enough, I have to admit Glaxo has got a reputation for being big and boring.

Buying Glaxo is not exactly pushing the boat out in terms of stock market ingenuity, I accept.

But do you know what? In these troubled times I’m not into taking unnecessary risks.

I like big and boring, particularly when big means a strong balance sheet that can withstand the economic storms and boring means it pays handsome dividends and buys back lots of its shares to improve shareholder returns.

The company revealed this week it had distributed every penny of the £5.6 billion free cash flow it generated last year, either in dividends or via share buybacks.

That’s an impressive achievement and shows that chief executive Andrew Witty is keen to look after his shareholders and put the legal problems of the past and the huge provisions it made in 2010 behind him.

But what about the future?

Critics acknowledge that the share price did well last year as the company was rerated. But a small but disappointing fall in sales last year and a caution from the company that profit margins would rise only slightly this year gave critics an opportunity to ask where will growth come from in future?

The big hope here is Glaxo’s pipeline of new drugs. The lack of new products under patent protection has been the fatal weakness of big pharmaceutical companies in recent years. However, Glaxo appears to be doing better than its arch rival AstraZeneca.

Investors will have to wait until next month to find out more but we know that Glaxo has 30 new treatments moving into the final stage of clinical development in the next three years.

If some of these come off it could prolong the rally in Glaxo’s shares, which seems to have come off the boil of late. As a nervous Top Stock investor my only worry about buying Glaxo is that I am coming late to the party. We shall just have to see how I do in another four months.

2 comments so far. Why not have your say?

Rob Walker

Feb 11, 2012 at 09:18

So why not wait until the next crash and buy at around 1200p? The current volatility of the markets suggests this will happen within the next 12 months. - you say you are coming 'late ' to the party but equally, maybe too soon?

report this

stisted

Feb 11, 2012 at 10:18

Yes - big and boring for the last several years, saved only by the divi - but can someone explain to me please the maths of share buy-backs against paying out extra dividend as it just does not seem to make sense? I can well understand that the directors may be reluctant to pay an increased divi which cannot be maintained in following years but there must be more to it than that?

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

From the Forums

+ Start a new discussion
Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet