4 ms·
Easily found on Google finance or similar sites: https://www.google.com/finance/beta/quote/XRX:NASDAQ?sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwifnoPB_L-RAxW3F1kFHVRxJ3UQ3ecFKAR6BA
by kevstev 10mo ago
Easily found on Google finance or similar sites: https://www.google.com/finance/beta/quote/XRX:NASDAQ?sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwifnoPB_L-RAxW3F1kFHVRxJ3UQ3ecFKAR6BAgjEAU&window=MAX https://www.google.com/finance/beta/quote/XRX:NASDAQ?sa=X&sq...
Not quite 50 years, but you get the idea.
- justin66 10mo agoIs there anything on that site that would, as I asked, factor in dividends when analyzing the company's performance? It's a classic problem when comparing stock charts with one another (or against the index) that they don't take into account dividends in a meaningful way. "Wow, that line has been flat for a long time! Why does anyone think this is a good investment?" (not meant to be a commentary on Xerox's performance at all - they're clearly in a bad state right now)
- kevstev 10mo agoLooks like this site does: https://totalrealreturns.com/n/VFINX,VBMFX,USDOLLAR,XRX https://totalrealreturns.com/n/VFINX,VBMFX,USDOLLAR,XRX Dividends are so out of favor now for most companies, it's not something I have personally cared that much about. But it is important to get a true picture, especially over very long timelines before tax laws changed that made buybacks more efficient.
- justin66 10mo agoThanks for the total return chart. Comparing XRX to IBM was interesting. A long term XRX investor who was perceptive enough to get out before the 1999 crash would have been very happy indeed. Something like three fourths of the S&P 500 pay a dividend, so it's not really an irrelevancy.