Every dividend list tells you what to buy. None of them publish what happened next. This one ranks the Top 100 dividend value stocks on three published pillars — fundamentals (can the payout be afforded), growth (is the payout and the business growing), valuation (is it cheap against its own history and its sector) — then seals the board with a hash and grades it forward against SPY, SCHD and VIG on total return, by rank decile, with the cut rate. The list is published; so is its record.
Data as of September 4, 2026 · 617 eligible of 1325 screened · 1 sealed board · chain intact
Its current row, the three pillars with every input, and every sealed board it sat on with the graded return. Pillars, the ranked universe and every company view are Starter and above; free visitors see pillars on the top 5 rows.
| Board | Sealed | Rank | Entry | 3m TR | 6m TR | 12m TR | To date | Cut |
|---|
Ranked by composite (fundamentals 40% · growth 30% · valuation 30%). Click any column title to sort by it; click again to flip. Starter and above open every pillar sub-score, the ranked universe beyond the board and every company view; free visitors see pillars on the top 5 rows.
| # | Company | Market cap | Yield | Div CAGR 5y | Streak | Composite | Cluster | Pillars F · G · V |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | INTU | $91.8B | 1.66% | +15.3% | 15.3y | 94.8 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 2 | ZTS | $31.7B | 2.80% | +17.1% | 13.0y | 94.3 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 3 | DOX | $7.5B | 3.66% | +9.8% | 14.3y | 94.1 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 4 | G | $6.4B | 2.01% | +11.8% | 9.8y | 91.5 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 5 | DPZ | $11.5B | 2.33% | +16.7% | 13.8y | 91.2 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 6 | OZK | $4.9B | 3.81% | +10.7% | 9.3y | 91.0 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 7 | PRI | $9.2B | 1.62% | +20.7% | 16.3y | 90.3 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 8 | FDS | $10.9B | 1.54% | +7.3% | 21.8y | 89.6 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 9 | BAH | $8.7B | 3.24% | +10.3% | 12.3y | 89.4 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 10 | TAC | $3.8B | 2.34% | +13.8% | 3.8y | 89.4 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 11 | WFG | $5.1B | 1.86% | +23.3% | 4.8y | 89.4 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 12 | MMS | $3.1B | 2.29% | +2.9% | 21.8y | 88.3 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 13 | SIGI | $5.5B | 1.87% | +11.5% | 23.0y | 88.1 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 14 | ACN | $114.9B | 3.49% | +13.1% | 7.0y | 87.9 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 15 | BIPC | $5.5B | 4.87% | +6.0% | 6.5y | 87.5 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 16 | YUMC | $15.2B | 2.66% | +18.3% | 8.5y | 87.5 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 17 | TRN | $2.3B | 4.38% | +8.4% | 12.3y | 87.4 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 18 | CINF | $26.6B | 2.20% | +8.0% | 23.3y | 87.2 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 19 | ALV | $9.3B | 2.78% | +47.5% | 15.5y | 87.1 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 20 | KBR | $4.7B | 1.79% | +9.5% | 18.8y | 86.9 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 21 | CMCSA | $94.6B | 4.98% | +6.6% | 18.8y | 86.0 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 22 | LOW | $114.5B | 2.45% | +13.3% | 23.0y | 85.2 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 23 | AOS | $8.3B | 2.38% | +6.7% | 22.8y | 85.1 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 24 | SON | $5.2B | 4.16% | +3.8% | 22.8y | 84.8 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 25 | EWBC | $18.1B | 2.45% | +18.9% | 17.5y | 84.6 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 26 | SSB | $10.5B | 2.44% | +5.3% | 22.5y | 84.6 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 27 | GNTX | $4.8B | 2.07% | 0.0% | 23.0y | 84.6 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 28 | CNI | $66.0B | 2.97% | +13.9% | 2.5y | 84.4 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 29 | MAS | $14.5B | 1.76% | +11.1% | 17.5y | 84.4 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 30 | TRI | $49.6B | 2.48% | +8.9% | 0.5y | 84.3 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 31 | GIL | $11.4B | 1.87% | +25.9% | 14.8y | 84.3 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 32 | INGR | $6.5B | 3.24% | +5.1% | 21.3y | 84.2 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 33 | FTS | $29.3B | 4.63% | +9.9% | 4.3y | 84.1 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 34 | STNG | $3.9B | 2.19% | +34.6% | 9.8y | 84.1 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 35 | NOC | $73.4B | 1.92% | +9.6% | 23.0y | 83.8 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 36 | HIG | $38.2B | 1.73% | +11.8% | 17.8y | 83.6 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 37 | IPAR | $3.7B | 2.74% | +45.0% | 5.8y | 83.5 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 38 | XYL | $25.0B | 1.63% | +9.0% | 15.0y | 83.5 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 39 | AVY | $13.4B | 2.28% | +8.3% | 17.3y | 83.3 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 40 | ATR | $8.2B | 1.51% | +5.3% | 22.8y | 83.2 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 41 | PEP | $188.4B | 4.30% | +11.5% | 22.8y | 82.8 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 42 | BBWI | $3.9B | 4.10% | +21.7% | 5.5y | 82.8 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 43 | RF | $26.1B | 3.94% | +11.5% | 17.5y | 82.8 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 44 | SFBS | $2.4B | 1.76% | +13.7% | 12.0y | 82.8 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 45 | OTIS | $27.3B | 2.47% | +14.3% | 6.5y | 82.7 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 46 | PNR | $9.7B | 1.79% | +6.1% | 8.3y | 82.7 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 47 | GGG | $12.9B | 1.52% | +9.5% | 22.5y | 82.7 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 48 | LKFN | $1.5B | 3.43% | +9.3% | 22.8y | 82.6 | Cheap quality | Pro |
| 49 | EIX | $22.0B | 6.18% | +5.7% | 22.8y | 82.3 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 50 | BEPC | $7.3B | 4.94% | +5.2% | 6.3y | 81.9 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 51 | CDW | $19.4B | 1.65% | +9.5% | 13.0y | 81.9 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 52 | ALL | $67.3B | 1.66% | +7.4% | 17.8y | 81.8 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 53 | LEA | $6.8B | 2.29% | +19.8% | 6.0y | 81.7 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 54 | STRA | $1.8B | 2.94% | +4.6% | 9.8y | 81.5 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 55 | COLM | $3.0B | 2.08% | +9.0% | 15.0y | 81.5 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 56 | WDFC | $2.8B | 1.97% | +7.5% | 22.8y | 81.3 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 57 | LVS | $29.1B | 2.70% | +1.3% | 3.3y | 81.1 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 58 | OFG | $2.3B | 2.63% | +34.1% | 11.0y | 81.1 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 59 | OLED | $3.8B | 2.43% | +22.1% | 9.8y | 81.1 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 60 | FUL | $3.0B | 1.82% | +7.8% | 22.5y | 81.0 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 61 | MKC | $14.0B | 3.69% | +7.3% | 22.8y | 80.8 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 62 | PPG | $25.2B | 2.63% | +5.4% | 22.8y | 80.6 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 63 | HOMB | $6.1B | 3.05% | +9.0% | 16.5y | 80.3 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 64 | ROL | $17.3B | 2.04% | +13.9% | 6.0y | 80.3 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 65 | EXPO | $3.3B | 1.81% | +14.4% | 8.5y | 80.2 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 66 | MGEE | $2.9B | 2.63% | +5.2% | 12.8y | 80.0 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 67 | PFBC | $1.1B | 3.09% | +18.3% | 12.0y | 79.9 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 68 | SIRI | $9.9B | 3.73% | +13.0% | 4.5y | 79.8 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 69 | RPM | $13.1B | 2.05% | +7.3% | 22.8y | 79.7 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 70 | OTEX | $6.4B | 4.68% | +10.9% | 13.5y | 79.6 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 71 | BANF | $3.8B | 1.74% | +7.6% | 22.8y | 79.5 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 72 | CTSH | $29.7B | 2.12% | +6.7% | 9.5y | 79.4 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 73 | AWR | $3.5B | 2.46% | +8.5% | 22.8y | 79.3 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 74 | RCL | $71.1B | 2.26% | +11.3% | 2.3y | 79.3 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 75 | ARCO | $1.7B | 3.43% | +1.2% | 3.3y | 79.2 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 76 | CWT | $3.0B | 2.68% | +7.7% | 22.8y | 79.2 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 77 | SBAC | $20.1B | 2.64% | +17.1% | 7.3y | 79.1 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 78 | BLX | $1.8B | 4.94% | +21.9% | 6.3y | 79.0 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 79 | POOL | $6.7B | 2.81% | +13.1% | 22.0y | 78.9 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 80 | CPA | $5.2B | 5.17% | +11.5% | 5.0y | 78.8 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 81 | EFSC | $2.4B | 2.17% | +12.5% | 21.8y | 78.8 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 82 | ESNT | $6.3B | 2.02% | +15.2% | 7.3y | 78.8 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 83 | SYY | $40.6B | 2.75% | +3.6% | 23.0y | 78.7 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 84 | CBU | $3.4B | 3.07% | +2.3% | 22.5y | 78.6 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 85 | AES | $10.6B | 4.76% | +3.4% | 14.0y | 78.5 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 86 | BIP | $17.1B | 4.90% | +6.0% | 6.5y | 78.0 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 87 | TRNO | $7.0B | 3.47% | +11.4% | 15.8y | 77.9 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 88 | CVE | $42.9B | 2.72% | +87.9% | 2.8y | 77.7 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 89 | WM | $88.1B | 1.73% | +9.3% | 18.5y | 77.6 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 90 | NXPI | $57.9B | 1.78% | +16.7% | 8.3y | 77.3 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 91 | GABC | $1.9B | 2.48% | +8.3% | 22.8y | 77.1 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 92 | MKTX | $5.8B | 1.91% | +3.7% | 13.8y | 77.0 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 93 | DG | $29.5B | 1.77% | +8.6% | 15.3y | 77.0 | Value tilt | Pro |
| 94 | PNFP | $15.3B | 1.98% | +20.0% | 13.0y | 76.9 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 95 | FFIN | $4.8B | 2.63% | +7.9% | 12.5y | 76.8 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 96 | THG | $8.1B | 1.66% | +6.4% | 6.8y | 76.7 | Growing payers | Pro |
| 97 | NEE | $174.7B | 2.99% | +10.1% | 22.8y | 76.6 | Quality at a price | Pro |
| 98 | HLNE | $4.6B | 2.33% | +11.5% | 9.5y | 76.6 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 99 | ES | $26.8B | 4.43% | +5.6% | 22.5y | 76.5 | Cheap but stretched | Pro |
| 100 | LHX | $48.0B | 1.95% | +5.3% | 22.8y | 76.5 | Growing payers | Pro |
The Top 100 in pillar space: nodes are companies (size = market cap, color = cluster), edges join each name to its three nearest neighbours on fundamentals, growth, valuation and yield. Clusters come from the data, not from sector labels — drag, zoom, hover for the pillars, click to open the ledger.
Plot any two dimensions. Bubble size is market cap; color is cluster. Pillar axes plot only the rows whose pillars you can see.
Every sealed board, graded on equal-weight total return (price plus cash dividends ex-dated after the seal) against SPY, SCHD and VIG at 3, 6 and 12 months. Verdict at twelve months: beat / matched / lagged SCHD at ±2pp. The record starts at launch — there is no reconstructed history, because a reconstruction would carry look-ahead.
| Board | Sealed | 3m | 6m | 12m | To date | vs SPY | vs SCHD | vs VIG | Cuts | Verdict | Hash |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Loading the record… | |||||||||||
Total return to date per sealed board, next to SPY, SCHD and VIG over the same window. One bar per board; the picture fills in month by month.
Does rank 1–10 actually beat rank 91–100? The decile record is the ranking's own test.
How names moved between sealed boards — entries, exits and climbers. Fills in from the second board.
Average pillar score by sector across the eligible universe. Sectors with fewer than three eligible names are omitted.
US common stocks with market cap ≥ $1B, trailing yield ≥ 1.5% (≤ 25%), at least five years of regular cash dividends and no cut in the trailing twelve months. Special dividends never count; a frequency change that keeps the annual cash is not a cut.
Fundamentals (40%): earnings and cash-flow coverage of the payout, debt/EBITDA, return on equity, a yield-trap check. Growth (30%): five-year dividend CAGR, raise streak, three-year EPS and revenue CAGR. Valuation (30%): P/E, P/S and EV/EBITDA as percentiles of the stock's own fiscal-year history, yield against its own five-year range, P/E against the sector median. Missing inputs drop and reweight — never guessed. A missing pillar lists the company but never ranks it.
On the first build of each month the Top 100 is sealed — ticker, rank, composite and closing price per row plus the benchmark closes — and hashed with SHA-256 into a chain that includes the previous seal. A sealed board is never edited. It is graded on equal-weight total return at 3 / 6 / 12 months against SPY, SCHD and VIG, by rank decile, plus the share of the board that cut within a year.
k-means over the three pillar scores and the yield (z-scored, deterministic seeding), edges to each company's three nearest neighbours in that space. Labels come from the cluster centroid — dividend compounders, cheap quality, high-yield slow growth — not from sector membership.
As of September 4, 2026, Intuit Inc (INTU) leads the QL Dividend Ledger with a composite of 94.8 and a 1.66% yield, followed by ZOETIS INC. (ZTS) and Amdocs Limited (DOX). The ranking weighs fundamentals 40%, growth 30% and valuation 30% — never yield alone.
Because a high yield is usually the market pricing a cut. Yield is one input among many, and the yield-trap check scores an abnormal yield as a risk. The valuation pillar asks whether the stock is cheap against its own history and its sector, which is a different question from how much it pays.
Each sealed board is a fixed list of 100 names with entry prices. At 3, 6 and 12 months the equal-weight total return of that list is compared with SPY, SCHD and VIG over the same window, and with itself by rank decile. The board's twelve-month verdict is beat, matched or lagged SCHD at ±2pp. Nothing is revised afterwards — the hash makes that checkable.
The fundamentals feed is not point-in-time, so any backfilled ranking would quietly know things it could not have known at the time. The record starts the day the first board was sealed and grows one board a month.
No. The ledger is diagnostic research over reported fundamentals, payment history and market prices. Rankings are computed by a published method, not recommended, and every input is visible for entitled members so the method can be argued with.
QL Dividend Ledger is diagnostic research over reported fundamentals (Polygon standardized financials), dividend history and split-adjusted market prices — not investment advice. A high yield is treated as a risk signal, not a reward. Grades use equal-weight total return with cash dividends ex-dated after the seal; benchmarks are graded the same way. Debt/EBITDA is net of cash only where the standardized feed reports cash. Sealed boards are append-only and hash-chained; the current board may drift from the latest seal between builds and the page says so.