The FTSE 100 has risen 27% over the last five years. However, some companies have done much better than others. In fact, more than a third have seen their shares rise 100% or more.
Im currently looking at some of your favourite blue chips and analysing their prospects for doubling your money in the next five years. Today, its the turn of GlaxoSmithKline (LSE: GSK) (NYSE: GSK.US).
The last five years
GSKs shares have fallen a long way short of doubling over the last five years. And, with a rise of 18%, they have delivered just two-thirds of the gain recorded by the FTSE 100.
GSKs share price rise represents a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 3.3%. Earnings per share (EPS) have increased at a CAGR of just 1.4%, with the remainder of the share price rise coming from an increase in the price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio. GSK currently trades on a P/E of 13.2, compared with 12.0 five years ago.
The next five years
For GSKs shares to double in the next five years, a 15% EPS CAGR would be required at a maintained P/E of 13.2. Anything less than 15% and the P/E would have to rise to make up the difference.
As things stand, EPS is actually set to fall for the current year, by a whopping 17%, giving a P/E of close to 16 at todays share price of 1,477p. This means the EPS CAGR for the subsequent four years would need to increase to over 18% at a maintained P/E of 16.
Given that GSK is coming through a period of patent expiries, the historic five-year EPS CAGR of 1.4% is unlikely to be a good guide to the companys future capabilities for earnings growth. However, even when GSK was on a roll, through the best part of last decade, the EPS CAGR was only as high as 8% way short of the growth required for the shares to double in the next five years.
Could GSKs P/E rise still higher to make up the difference? Lets say analysts are on the mark with their 17% fall in EPS for the current year, and GSK then returns to an 8% CAGR for the four subsequent years. What would the P/E need to be five years from now for the shares to have doubled? The answer is around 23. Thats even higher than the premium bid rating given to AstraZeneca this year by Pfizers offer.
On this basis, I think were unlikely to see GSKs shares rise 100% over the next five years. Still, the companys defensive steady-Eddie qualities are attractive for many investors, and a juicy 5.4% dividend yield (and potential income growth) on top of the performance of the shares is not to be overlooked.
No investor’s portfolio will ever contain only the market’s stellar performers, but it does help to have at least some big winners! Which is why I’m confident you’ll benefit from reading the Motley Fool’s brand new report “How You Could Retire Seriously Rich“.
You see,in this FREE report, our crack team of analysts explain how seven strategic steps and just 20 minutes a month could help towards turning YOU into one of Britain’s growing number of “surprise” millionaires.
This free report comes with no obligation — simply click here.
G A Chester has no position in any shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has recommended GlaxoSmithKline. We Fools don’t all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.
