A practical deep dive into using the Gordon Growth Model with stable dividend assumptions, complete with step-by-step examples, insights, and a guided vignette for real-world application.
So, you’ve probably heard how the Dividend Discount Model (DDM) focuses on the present value of expected future dividends. Well, in this section, we’ll step into a classic single-stage DDM scenario. In the exam, you’ll often see it introduced with a short narrative—maybe referencing a stable firm with a consistent payout. The item-set format can include a bit of “storyline” or background, so it’s helpful to know exactly how to isolate the critical numbers.
In our example, we’ll check out a hypothetical utility company, “Alpha Utilities,” which is projected to grow its dividend at a stable 4% rate annually. Let’s run with that. This scenario will help you sharpen your skill at reading vignettes, picking out the key data, and applying the formula quickly (but carefully).
The single-stage DDM—often called the Gordon Growth Model—relies on these core inputs:
• D₀: The current (most recent) dividend per share.
• g: The expected annual growth rate of dividends (assumed constant, at least in the single-stage model).
• r: The required rate of return or cost of equity for the firm.
And in words, the model says: “Today’s value of the equity is essentially the next dividend divided by the difference between investor’s required return and the growth rate.” Symbolically:
$$ V_0 = \frac{D_1}{r - g} $$
But remember, D₁ is next period’s dividend: D₁ = D₀ × (1 + g).
Let’s walk through the sample scenario. This might look super familiar from your prior reading, but it’s always nice to see it in a “test-like” format.
• D₀ = USD 2.00 (last year’s dividend)
• g = 4% (steady growth assumption)
• r = 9% (cost of equity based on CAPM or some risk-based approach)
We start by projecting the next year’s dividend:
$$ D_1 = D_0 \times (1 + g) = 2.00 \times (1 + 0.04) = 2.00 \times 1.04 = 2.08. $$
Now, you plug that D₁ into the single-stage formula:
$$ V_0 = \frac{D_1}{r - g} = \frac{2.08}{0.09 - 0.04} = \frac{2.08}{0.05} = 41.60. $$
Hence, the estimated intrinsic value is USD 41.60.
Imagine Alpha Utilities is trading at USD 39.00. If your calculation shows a fair value of USD 41.60, it suggests that the stock may be undervalued by USD 2.60. On an exam, you might see the question: “Is the stock overvalued, undervalued, or fairly valued based on the single-stage DDM?” You can quickly answer, “It appears to be undervalued,” given the difference.
But, well, no model is perfect. And you might want to ask: “Is 4% dividend growth realistic? Is 9% the right cost of equity?” If the utility industry’s demand is stable, maybe so. Or maybe rates are on the rise, driving up r. Even small changes in g or r can lead to significantly different valuations.
In a vignette, the text might hint that the firm’s sector faces increased regulation, or costs are rising, or the economy is shifting. Such clues may suggest a slowdown in growth or more uncertainty in discount rates. Pay attention to these narrative bits. A typical item set might test your ability to interpret that new rate environment by doing a quick “What if r = 10%?” recalculation.
A good practice is to see how interest rates or the growth assumption can shock your intrinsic value. For instance, if r were to jump to 10%, the math changes quickly:
• With r = 10%, and D₁ = 2.08,
$$ V_0 = \frac{2.08}{0.10 - 0.04} = \frac{2.08}{0.06} = 34.67. $$
That’s quite a drop from USD 41.60. The stock might actually look slightly overpriced if it still trades around USD 39.00.
Below is a quick visual flowchart of how you’d typically proceed in analyzing a single-stage dividend scenario. It also captures the “mental steps” you might go through when reading a vignette.
flowchart LR A["Step 1: Gather Inputs <br/> (D₀, g, r)"] --> B["Step 2: Calculate D₁ <br/> = D₀ × (1 + g)"] B --> C["Step 3: Compute Intrinsic Value <br/> V₀ = D₁ / (r − g)"] C --> D["Step 4: Compare Intrinsic Value <br/> to Market Price"] D --> E["Step 5: Evaluate Assumptions <br/> (Could r or g change?)"]
If you enjoy double-checking your math—or you’re super into coding—try the snippet below:
1D0 = 2.00
2g = 0.04
3r = 0.09
4
5D1 = D0 * (1 + g)
6V0 = D1 / (r - g)
7
8print(f"Next Dividend (D1): ${D1:.2f}")
9print(f"Intrinsic Value: ${V0:.2f}")
This should output:
• Next Dividend (D1): $2.08
• Intrinsic Value: $41.60
So that’s basically what we found by hand.
• Overly Precise Growth: If the exam text suggests that growth “might decline due to new competition,” maybe that stable 4% is now 3% or 2%. Check for disclaimers or footnotes.
• Ignoring Macroeconomic Twists: Interest rate changes—like moves in the risk-free rate or shifts in market sentiment—could raise or lower the cost of equity.
• Failing to Keep Dividend Timelines Straight: Make sure you’re always discounting the correct dividend figure (D₁ is next year’s dividend, not last year’s).
• Confusing Intrinsic Value with Market Price: Intrinsic value is theoretical. The question might also ask you how to reconcile real-life discrepancies between your DDM-based value and the actual trading price.
• CFA Institute End-of-Chapter Questions, which usually include item sets similar to Alpha Utilities.
• Corporate Finance by Berk & DeMarzo (for deeper theoretical coverage of dividend growth assumptions).
• Periodicals like The Wall Street Journal or Financial Times to see how analysts discuss dividend expectations.
Important Notice: FinancialAnalystGuide.com provides supplemental CFA study materials, including mock exams, sample exam questions, and other practice resources to aid your exam preparation. These resources are not affiliated with or endorsed by the CFA Institute. CFA® and Chartered Financial Analyst® are registered trademarks owned exclusively by CFA Institute. Our content is independent, and we do not guarantee exam success. CFA Institute does not endorse, promote, or warrant the accuracy or quality of our products.