Is Reed Elsevier The Ultimate Retirement Share?

Published in Company Comment on 13 December 2012

Will shares in Reed Elsevier (LSE: REL) help you build a FTSE-beating retirement fund?

The last five years have been tough for those in retirement. Portfolio valuations have been hammered and annuity rates have plunged. There's no sign of things improving anytime soon, either, as the eurozone and the UK economy look set to muddle through at best for some years to come.

A great way of protecting yourself from the downturn, however, is by building your retirement fund with shares of large, well-run companies that should grow their earnings steadily over the coming decades. Over time, such investments ought to result in rising dividends and inflation-beating capital growth.

In this series, I'm tracking down the UK large-caps that have the potential to beat the FTSE 100 (UKX) over the long term and support a lower-risk income-generating retirement fund (you can see the companies I've covered so far on this page).

Today, I'm going to take a look at Reed Elsevier (LSE: REL) (NYSE: RUK.US), the specialist publisher and exhibition organiser.

Reed Elsevier vs. FTSE 100

Let's start with a look at how Reed Elsevier has performed against the FTSE 100 over the last 10 years:

Total Returns2008200920102011201210 yr trailing avg
Reed Elsevier-35.1%5.2%9.9%-0.3%28.0%2.9%
FTSE 100-28.3%27.3%12.6%-2.2%9.3%9.1%

Source: Morningstar (2012 year to 30/11/12)

(Total return includes both changes to the share price and reinvested dividends. These two ingredients combined are what make it possible for equity portfolios to regularly outperform cash and bonds over the long term.)

Reed Elsevier has performed strongly against the FTSE 100 this year, but its 10-year trailing average is disappointing and reflects the firm's slow recovery from the 2008 crash. However, the firm does now seem to be growing revenues and earnings once more, so could it be a retirement share?

What's the score?

To help me pinpoint suitable investments, I like to score companies on key financial metrics that highlight the characteristics I look for in a retirement share. Let's see how Reed Elsevier shapes up:

Year founded1894
Market cap£15.4bn
Net debt£3.3bn
Dividend Yield3.4%
5 year average financials
Operating margin19.2%
Interest cover5.0x
EPS growth3.0%
Dividend growth3.3%
Dividend cover1.8x

Source: Morningstar, Reuters, Reed Elsevier

Here's how I've scored Reed Elsevier on each of these criteria:

LongevityLike many FTSE 100 firms, Reed Elsevier has a long pedigree.5/5
Performance vs. FTSEDisappointing recovery from 2008 crash.3/5
Financial strengthStrong profitability is tempered by a substantial debt pile.3/5
EPS growthEarnings growth has been slow.3/5
Dividend growthAverage yield, slow growth and little capacity for big increases.3/5
Total: 17/25

In common with many publishers, Reed Elsevier has struggled to generate growth from its stable of trade magazines and information services. Profits have risen, but these have mostly been the result of cost-cutting, which is probably approaching its limit. There doesn't seem any obvious catalyst for growth in Reed's publishing business, but it does remain profitable and the company's exhibition division reported a 34% increase in pre-tax profits for the first half of 2012, after launching a number of new events in overseas markets.

Looking at the bigger picture, Reed Elsevier has a fairly solid dividend history with only one cut -- in 2000 -- in the last 20 years. Although it took until 2006 for the dividend to regain its 1999 level, the company has continued to grow the dividend modestly each year, and the average 5-year dividend growth rate of 3.3% has broadly kept pace with inflation. Reed's 5-year average dividend cover level of 1.8 times suggests that the company does not have the capacity to grow dividends any faster, but its 3.4% yield is in line with the FTSE 100 average, so this is acceptable, if not outstanding.

Reed's operations are also highly profitable, despite their lack of growth. The group's 5-year average operating margin is over 19% and its operating profit for the first half of this year was 27%, which should enable the company to continue to pay down some of its substantial £3.3bn -- £1.2 billion of which will need to be repaid or rolled over by June 2013. Reed's net debt equates to 2.3 times adjusted EBITDA, which while manageable, is slightly higher than I like to see. The firm's interest payments account for about 13% of operating profits -- reducing debt would therefore improve profitability, and free up cash for growth and dividend payments.

Overall, Reed Elsevier's score of 17/25 reflects its value as a solid, but unspectacular retirement share. It has a long and successful history, and while many publishing companies are struggling to adapt to a low-cost digital future, this firm's bias towards trade customers and information services should help it mitigate this risk.

Top income picks

Doing your own research is important, but another good way of identifying great dividend-paying shares is to study the choices of successful professional investors.

One of the most successful income investors currently working in the City is fund manager Neil Woodford, who manages more money for private investors than any other City manager. Neil Woodford's High Income fund grew by 342% in the 15 years to 31 October 2012, during which time the FTSE All-Share index managed a gain of only 125%.

You can learn about Neil Woodford's top holdings and how he generates such fantastic returns in this free Motley Fool report. Many of Mr Woodford's choices look like excellent retirement shares to me and the report explains how he chose some of his biggest holdings.

This report is completely free and I strongly recommend you download "8 Shares Held By Britain's Super Investor" today, as it is available for a limited time only.

> Roland does not own shares in Reed Elsevier.

Share & subscribe


The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

ukvalueinvestor 13 Dec 2012 , 2:22pm

It's a reasonable enough company, but I just think the price is too high. There are many other similar companies out there with higher yields and lower PEs.

I'd say this is one for the watch list. Perhaps somewhere below £5 might be interesting...

UncleEbenezer 14 Dec 2012 , 1:01pm

Price high? What in the sector is lower-priced without having serious issues? If REL goes back down below £5 it has to be because something bad happened.

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as as opposed to

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.