“I buy on the assumption that they could close the market the next day and not reopen it for five years.”
— Warren Buffett
A five-year holding period is a useful test of whether a business can compound value through both price appreciation and dividends. For Colgate-Palmolive Co. (NYSE: CL), the five-year buy-and-hold outcome from July 9, 2021 through July 8, 2026 produced a positive total return, with dividend reinvestment contributing meaningfully to the result. The figures below show how a $10,000 investment in CL would have performed over that span.
| Start date: | 07/09/2021 |
|
|||
| End date: | 07/08/2026 | ||||
| Start price/share: | $82.43 | ||||
| End price/share: | $93.04 | ||||
| Starting shares: | 121.32 | ||||
| Ending shares: | 136.56 | ||||
| Dividends reinvested/share: | $9.76 | ||||
| Total return: | 27.06% | ||||
| Average annual return: | 4.91% | ||||
| Starting investment: | $10,000.00 | ||||
| Ending investment: | $12,708.21 | ||||
What a 5-Year Investment in Colgate-Palmolive Delivered
Over the measurement period, a $10,000 investment in Colgate-Palmolive grew to $12,708.21, assuming all cash dividends were reinvested. That equates to a total return of 27.06% and an annualized return of 4.91% as of 07/08/2026. These figures were computed using the Dividend Channel DRIP Returns Calculator.
The key point is that the result was not driven by share price alone. CL rose from $82.43 to $93.04 over the period, but the total outcome improved because reinvested dividends increased the share count from 121.32 to 136.56. For a mature consumer staples company, that distinction matters: a meaningful portion of long-term shareholder return can come from cash distributions rather than rapid multiple expansion.
Why Dividend Reinvestment Mattered
Colgate-Palmolive paid $9.76 per share in cumulative dividends over the five years covered here. Reinvesting those distributions added to the investor’s position over time, allowing subsequent dividends to be earned on a larger base of shares. That is the basic mechanics of dividend compounding, and it is especially relevant for companies with relatively steady payout profiles.
In this case, the share count increased by more than 15 shares through reinvestment. Even when price appreciation is moderate, that incremental ownership can make a noticeable difference to ending value. For buy-and-hold investors, total return is therefore the more informative metric than price return in isolation.
Current Yield and Yield on Cost
Using the most recent annualized dividend rate of $2.12 per share, CL has a current yield of approximately 2.28% based on the ending share price of $93.04. Another useful reference point is yield on cost, which measures the current annual dividend against the original purchase price rather than the current market price.
For this five-year period, the yield on cost works out to approximately 2.77%, based on the original entry price of $82.43 per share. That figure does not change the market value of the investment, but it helps illustrate how a rising or sustained dividend stream can improve the income generated from the original capital committed.
How to Read These Results
Several conclusions follow from this Colgate-Palmolive five-year total return profile:
- Price appreciation was positive, but not the sole driver of performance.
- Dividend reinvestment materially increased the final share count and ending value.
- The annualized return of 4.91% reflects the characteristics of a defensive, cash-generative consumer staples business rather than a high-growth equity.
- Yield on cost can rise above the current yield when the original purchase price is below the current market price.
Colgate-Palmolive operates in a segment of the market that is often evaluated for brand strength, recurring consumer demand, pricing resilience, margin stability, and consistency of capital returns. Over a five-year horizon, those qualities tend to show up less through dramatic stock moves and more through steady accumulation of total return.
“Know what you own and why you own it.” — Peter Lynch