Dividend Kings List for 2026

A dividend king is a company that has managed to increase dividends to shareholders for at least 50 years in a row.

There are only 52 such companies in the US, and perhaps a couple more in the rest of the world. It is not a small achievement to have been able to reward long-term shareholders with a dividend raise for over half a century.

Over the past 50 years, some calamities experienced include:

- Seven Recessions since 1967
- The Vietnam War
- The oil crisis in the 1970s
- Stagflationary 1970s
- Double digit interest rates in the 1980s
- Fall of the Soviet Union in 1991
- 9/11 in 2001
- The Dot-com bubble bursting in 2000
- The housing bubble bursting in 2007 - 2008
- ZIRP and NIRP since 2009

- The Covid-19 Pandemic

Throughout this calamity each of those businesses managed to grow earnings, and raise the dividend to their long-term shareholders. If you are looking for a long-term shareholder base, the best way to build it is by paying those owners more every single year. This is a simple, but novel idea for corporations to embrace.

When I first came up with the idea for the list of dividend kings in 2010, there were only eleven companies on it. Our 2025 list includes 52 companies. 

We had five additions and zero deletions.

The new additions for the current year include:

Archer Daniels Midland (ADM)

MGE Energy (MGEE)

Pentair (PNR)

RLI Corp (RLI)

United Bankshares (UBSI)

There were no companies that were deleted from the list in 2025. 

These actions brought the number of companies to 52, from 47 at the end of 2024. 

These were consistent with my predictions from last year. It is a testament to the predictable nature of their businesses, not in my forecasting abilities.

Note, there were two name changes amongst the Dividend Kings.

Lancaster Colony (LANC) renamed itself to Marzetti (MZTI)

SJW Corp renamed itself to H2O (HTO)

I expect the following companies to join the list of dividend kings by 2026/2027:

McDonald's (MCD)

Sysco (SYY)

Medtronic (MDT)

Clorox (CLX)

There are a few companies, which are incorrectly listed as dividend kings elsewhere. One is Sysco (SYY). Upon review of their dividend history, I realized they only have 49 years of consecutive annual dividend increases under their belt. They would be eligible for inclusion in 2026. They kept dividends unchanged in 1975 and 1976. It pays to review the dividend history, before deciding 

I did some research on historical changes of the Dividend Kings list, which you may find interesting. I reviewed the evolution of the dividend kings prior to 2007 in the article, which has not been done by anyone else. 

Since 2010, there have been only six companies that have left the list. One, Vectren (VVC) was acquired. The second, Diebold (DBD), kept dividends unchanged, but ultimately ended up cutting them. The third, V.F. Corp (VFC) became a dividend king in 2022, but left the list after 2 months as the company cut dividends in February 2023. The year 2024 had a record number of deletions, as 3M (MMM), Walgreens (WBA) and Leggett & Platt (LEG) cut dividends.

There were no deletions in 2025.

The companies in the 2026 dividend kings list include: 

Note: Data as of Dec 26, 2025

You can download the list from here

This track record is a testament to the stability of the underlying businesses that generated the earnings growth necessary to grow the dividend for half a century (and longer). This track record is an indication of a business that is relatively immune to outside shocks. This resilience throughout the period manifests itself into the long stretch of dividend increases, spanning over half a century.

While these companies are not investment recommendations, I post them as examples for further study by serious dividend investors. Studying the businesses, their industries, could give you clues as to the type of business that can flourish over a half of a century.

As I mentioned above, I have been compiling the list of dividend kings since 2010. To view the historical changes in the list, please follow the links below:

Dividend Kings List for 2025

Dividend Kings List for 2024

Dividend Kings List for 2023

Dividend Kings List for 2022

Dividend Kings List for 2021

Dividend Kings List for 2020

Dividend Kings List For 2019

2018 Dividend Kings List

Dividend Kings List for 2017

Dividend Kings for 2016

Dividend Kings List for 2015

The Dividend Kings List for 2014

The Dividend Kings List Keeps Expanding in 2013

Eleven Dividend Kings, Raising dividends for 50+ years (2012 list)

Ten Dividend Kings raising dividends for over 50 years (2010 list)

Evolution of the Dividend Kings List Before 2010

Historical Performance of the Dividend Kings List

Thank you for reading!

Sixteen Companies Raising Dividends Last Week

I review the list of dividend increases every single week, as part of my monitoring process. This exercise helps monitor existing holdings. I am a firm believer that these dividend increases provide strong signaling for how businesses are doing. They are especially helpful to review compared to the historical average, and trends in fundamentals.

This exercise also helps uncover potential companies for further research.

Over the past week, there were 16 dividend growth companies that raised dividends. All of these companies have a minimum ten year track record of consistent annual dividend increases: 

This list of course is not a recommendation to do anything. It is simply a listing of companies that raised dividends last week, which also have a ten year track record of annual dividend increases under their belt.

I find it helpful to check the most recent dividend increase and compare it to the 5 or 10 year average. This provides helpful insight as to where things are going, fundamentally.

It is also helpful to review trends in earnings and payout ratios, for further context.

Last but not least, it is helpful to review growth relative to valuations too. This helps me identify a list of companies to prioritize researching further from here.

Relevant Articles:

- Sixteen Companies Raising Dividends Last Week

- 14 Dividend Growth Stocks Raising Dividends Last Week

- Three Dividend Growth Stocks Raising Dividends Last Week

- Thirteen Dividend Growth Stocks Growing Dividends Last Week

Focusing on the Losers and Missing the Big Picture

Many investors I talk to always seem focused on the losers. Just because you lose some money on a portion of investments, doesn't mean that the whole strategy is bad. What matters is making money overall on the portfolio level. Losing money is part of the game on a portion of investments. Even Warren Buffett and Peter Lynch are not right 100% of the time.

Everyone is focused on the losers, and thus ends up missing on the big picture.

As they keep losing, their relative weight in the portfolio decreases and if I did not risk more than a certain amount (decreased by dividends received), they become a footnote.

At this point, they do not matter. Unless they turn around, which some time they do. (e.g. in 1999 everyone thought Philip Morris would fail... and it didn't. Also in 2003-4 many thought McDonald's is toast.)

For example, if I invested $1,000 in Lehman Brothers in 2007, I lost $1,000. 

If I invested $1,000 in 3M in 2007, I broke even when I sold

But if I invested $1,000 into Microsoft in 2007, I have $15,000.

Note, these three examples ignore dividends received and allocated elsewhere from a risk management perspective. Those dividends shift the return expectations higher.

Back in 2007, it would have been impossible how each one would do.

Most of my investments won't be Microsoft, but most won't be Lehman either.

I expect to make most of my money on about 40% of my investments. The other 60% will likely end up break even on average.

I just do not know which one today will do great, and which one would falter.

Hence, my goal is to make sure I took my entry signal and not mess up with the compounding early on. (TL;DR - Stick to my process)

I sell rarely, because my audit showed me my sales have been a mistake, on average. I do it after a dividend cut, and if a stock is acquired. the longer i invest, the more inactive/passive in holding I try to be...

The main point behind the post could further be strengthtened with the example of Ronald Read, the janitor millionaire who died with a portfolio worth $8 Million at 92. He managed to amass his fortune with a patient, long-term, and disciplined approach that favored blue chip dividend paying stocks. One of his investments was Lehman Brothers, which resulted in a 100% loss. However, he also had 90+ other securities in his portfolio which helped him overcome this one big loss, and end up with a multi-million dollar portfolio regardless.

Ronald Read's story shows that can lose 100% on a single security in a diversified portfolio.

And still end up with $8 Million, because you are diversified and hold 100 companies.

Today we discussed a few important principles. First, focus on the big picture, and do not get lost in the weeds. Second, design a strategy with built in protections (e.g. diversify, and invest regularly). Third, stick to your strategy through thick or thin - that's how long-term wealth is accumulated. Fourth - you won't be right on every investment. But if you stick to it when you are right, you can make a lot in capital gains and dividends - it's potentially unlimited. And if you are wrong, the most you can lose is what you invested (sans any dividends received and invested elsewhere)

Sixteen Companies Raising Dividends Last Week

I review the list of dividend increases every week as part of my monitoring process.

This exercise helps monitor the development in companies I already own. It also helps me monitor the breadth in the dividend growth investing universe.

I typically focus my attention on the more established dividend growth companies in those weekly review. 

I define "established" as a company that has managed to increase dividends for at least ten years in a row. I have found that this requirement weeds out a lot of cyclical and accidental records of annual dividend increases. It's also early enough in the grand scheme of things for the types of companies that will one day reach dividend king status...

Over the past week, there were sixteen companies with a minimum ten year track record of annual dividend increases, which also increased dividends to shareholders. 

The companies include:

Note this list shows data as of Friday, December 12th. The dividend increases are based on comparing the new dividend payment relative to the previous dividend announced. This works to the YOY change in dividends for most of the companies, except for the ones who raise dividends multiple times per year. For example, Realty Income eked out a 0.20% raise versus the last monthly dividend - however this is a 2.27% raise over the monthly dividend paid during the same time lasty year.

Of course, this list is merely a list of companies that increased dividends last week.

It is not a recommendation or a "buy list" by any means necessary.

It does provide some perspective in how I think about Dividend Growth Investing.

For example, I would compare the recent dividend increase for a company to the five - and ten - year average. That most recent dividend increase provides helpful insight into management's evaluation of the business and economic environment in the near term. 

A slowdown in dividend growth versus the average is somewhat of a warning signal, that would warrant further review if I owned the business. If I didn't, it would likely place it in the do not review pile as of yet.

An increase in dividend growth versus the average could pique my interest, and warrent further review to determine if there is fundamental shift upwards to warrant that increase. One also has to be a little skeptical, as many times a large one-time increase in dividends could signal management that is too overconfident or trying to look that way. 

In general, Iwant a slow and steady growth within a range that's probably the most sustainable. Dividend growth should closely track the growth in fundamentals (read - earnings per share OR FCF/share if you want to be fancy). Any divergence where dividend growth is happening despite deterioration of the business should be studied.

All of those instances above require monitoring recent dividend increases to the historical averages, along with trends in earnings per share, payout ratios, major events (e.g. acquisitions). 

Last but not least, you also want to review company valuations. Valuations are the combination of current P/E ratios, dividend yields along with historical dividend growth and growth expectations.

Relevant Articles:

- 14 Dividend Growth Stocks Raising Dividends Last Week

- Three Dividend Growth Stocks Raising Dividends Last Week

- Thirteen Dividend Growth Stocks Growing Dividends Last Week

My Favorite Perplexity in Investing

My favorite perplexities of investing:

I would only buy a security that fits my entry criteria, but then I would hold onto to it until it hits my exit criteria.

I would hold on to that security, even if it does not fit my entry criteria anymore, provided it has not hit my exit criteria.

This goes contrary to the popular belief that once an investment does not meet entry criteria, it should be sold, and proceeds reinvested elsewhere. The popular belief is actually quite costly, because you end up with quite a lot of turnover. This turnover ends up costing you in terms of fees and commissions, taxes that work against compounding, and behavioral errors where you end up missing out on a few rare big winners by selling them too early. You may end up paying a huge opportunity cost too. Auditing your investment decisions will uncover those glaring gaps. Few investors audit their decisions, because not many want to admit (even to themselves) they are wrong on something. But that would allow them to grow and learn and improve.

This exercise has helped me stay invested in companies that looked "overvalued" but kept growing earnings, dividends, intrinsic value. One such example is Visa (V), which has only looked "cheap" per my then criteria in 2011 - 2012, 2015, 2020 etc. This is when I bought it. However, had I sold when it looked "overvalued", I would have ended up paying taxes on the gains, and probably ended up reinvesting the money into something with lower expected returns. I also learned from this exercise that my criteria have gaps and blind spots, which I wasn't aware of until several years later. I don't know what I don't know yet, but I would know that in a few years. This is why I need a process that gives me some fail safes, to protect me against my own brilliance or lack thereof. This is why I need to audit decisions, and learn from them too, in order to improve.

It really helps to have a process that takes care of:

1. Types of companies you invest in

2. Fundamentals and qualitative factors

3. Diversification

4. Entry/Exit Rules

5. Risk management

6. Keeping costs low

7. Continuous improvement

While it helps to have a process, it is also helpful to understand that it has limitations as well. Hence the need to continuous improvement. 

This has also helped me stay invested in companies that experienced temporary issues, and it looked like they are about to crumble, but they recovered. Case in point is companies like McDonald's, which many hated on various occasions over the years, mostly due to flat share prices making the chicken littles scared. Patient investors should not be scared from long periods of flat share prices, provided fundamentals are not permanently impaired. These periods probably provide a good opportunity to acquire pieces of good businesses on a rare sale.

That being said, I also ended up overstaying my welcome on companies that ended up not doing as well subsequently, and quietly went all downhill. Cases in point include Walgreen's and 3M.

This is where having risk management process in place, and good diversification helps reduce losses when wrong. I am happy that I limit amount I invest per security to a certain dollar amount (which is basically a % of portfolio value - so for a $100,000 portfolio, I would not allocate more than say $1,000 or $2,000 to a security at cost. If fundamentals change in the process of accumulating a position, I would likely allocate much less at cost than even the $1,000 however)

The downside of selecting a bad investment and staying invested for too long is that I may lose money on it. However, downside risk is limited to what I invested, minus dividends received.

It help to spread risk between many companies and industries and time.

I do believe that the bigger risk is getting scared away from a good company, and selling too early, thus missing out on decades of rising earnings, dividends and intrinsic value.

After all, the most I could lose is 100% on an investment.

The most I could gain is unlimited.

The point of this post is that everyones process has room for improvement. You need to audit your investment decisions, and learn and improve. However, you also need to design fail safe procedures to ensure that any errors you experience before enlightenment are not too costly and that they are limited in scope and amount. The bigger mistakes are not just the losses you will realize, but missing out on the big success stories either because you didn't take your entry signal or you cut a flower way too soon.