Buying 10,000 Lloyds shares generates a passive income of…
Lloyds' (LSE:LLOY) shares are by far one of the most popular investments in the UK. While the banking stock hasn't been the best performer over the years, its large size, stability, and critical place in Britain's economy make it quite attractive among more conservative investors. Not to mention, the group's 4.1% dividend yield, which makes it an alluring source of passive income, especially now that profits are benefiting from higher interest rates.
But how much passive income can investors make with this stock? Let's explore.
At the current share price, anyone with around £7,800 to spare can snap up 10,000 shares in Lloyds today. That's a nice big round number. And with trailing 12 months dividends per share at 3.17p, such an investment would instantly unlock a passive income of £317 a year.
Of course, this calculation assumes that Lloyds doesn't cut shareholder payouts moving forward. But looking at the latest analyst forecasts, the consensus suggests that doesn't seem likely. Stronger earnings are paving the way for excess cash flows. As such, dividends by the end of 2025 are expected to reach 3.46p before climbing even further the following year to 4.12p.
In other words, by 2026, those 10,000 shares could be generating closer to £412. And that number could be even higher for those who decide to reinvest any dividends received along the way.
With that in mind, is this a no-brainer stock to buy for income-seeking investors?
While the prospect of earning a market-beating dividend yield's exciting, it's important to remember that even the biggest businesses have their risks. Lloyds' financial position looks robust, but there's the upcoming potential fallout surrounding the UK motor finance scandal.
Management has already put aside £1.2bn to cover any potential legal penalties should the courts rule against lenders. But if legal experts are correct, the fallout could be considerably larger, potentially compromising profits and, in turn, dividends.
Furthermore, as the UK's largest mortgage lender, Lloyds is highly sensitive to the British housing market. Conditions have generally been improving as mortgage rates have tumbled thanks to interest rate cuts from the Bank of England.
However, with the recent increase in Stamp Duty kicking in, mortgage approvals in April took a notable hit, falling to 60,463 versus the 63,000 analysts were expecting. Is that a disaster? No. But it does make Lloyds' life harder in terms of achieving growth and expanding its dividend.
As a business, Lloyds isn't likely to disappear any time soon. As a stock, the short-term outlook's growing increasingly uncertain, in my opinion. So despite its popularity and seemingly lucrative dividend potential, I'm not rushing to add it to my portfolio today.
The post Buying 10,000 Lloyds shares generates a passive income of… appeared first on The Motley Fool UK.
More reading
5 Stocks For Trying To Build Wealth After 50
One Top Growth Stock from the Motley Fool
Zaven Boyrazian has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Lloyds Banking Group Plc. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.
Motley Fool UK 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
35 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Julian Harris: Is Sorry the Hardest Word for UK Chancellors?
By Nearly three years on, the Tories have apologized for their disastrous mini-budget that put sterling into freefall and forced the Bank of England to prop up government debt. Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride said today that the party 'put at risk the very stability which Conservatives had always said must be carefully protected' during Liz Truss's brief and calamitous spell as prime minister in the autumn of 2022. In a speech at the Royal Society of Arts, trailed in some media last night, Stride admitted that regaining credibility 'will take time. And it also requires contrition.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
If I could only save one UK share in my SIPP, here's what it would be
No investor should gamble their future on just one UK share. That would be an almighty risk. My self-invested personal pension (SIPP) holds around 20 different stocks. While I would happily junk two or three of them (I'm looking at you Aston Martin, Glencore and Ocado Group), binning the rest would be painful. But let's say somebody put a gun to my head. Which would be the sole survivor? There are some stocks that investors might buy if they knew in advance they could only hold one. Utility stock National Grid is seen as a solid dividend growth play, but I don't actually hold it. Consumer goods giant Unilever has both defensive merits. I did hold that, but recently banked a profit as I was underwhelmed by its growth potential. So what about the stocks I do hold? Which would I save? I'd hate to sell private equity specialist 3i Group, which has doubled my money in 18 months. It's had a great run though, and looks a little bit too expensive, so it would have to go. I'd also hate to offload insurer Phoenix Group Holdings, whose shares are up 30% in a year, and still yield a bumper 8.3%. It's a happy day when the Phoenix dividend hits my SIPP, and the same applies for rival FTSE 100 wealth manager M&G. Another super-high yielder. Yet both would have to go. If those dividends are cut at any time, the investment case could collapse. I don't think they will, but the stakes are high here. I'd also offload my SIPP growth stock stars Rolls-Royce Holdings and BAE Systems. They've done brilliantly, but remember, I can only hold one stock here. I'd bank my profits on both to make way for last stock standing, Lloyds Banking Group (LSE: LLOY). I bought the high street bank on three occasions in 2023, and it's been the surprise over-achiever in my portfolio. I hoped for modest share price growth. Instead, Lloyd shares are up 40% in a year (and 72% since I bought them). Once my reinvested dividends are added, my total return is almost 100% in 18 months. Lloyds is now almost entirely focused on the UK domestic market, which makes it a play on our economic fortunes. There are good sides to that – but also bad ones. The UK economy isn't exactly thriving right now, while inflation remains a menace. Mortgage rates have actually been rising again in recent weeks, which could further squeeze house prices, and slow demand. Lloyds has also had to set aside hefty sums for potential debt impairments, and could be on the hook for a billion or two, following the motor finance mis-selling scandal. But despite its strong run, the Lloyds price doesn't look over valued, with a price-to-earnings ratio of just over 12. The forecast yield of 4.4% should keep the income flowing. Especially since it's covered 2.1 times by earnings. The bank is also running a hefty £1.7bn share buyback. Lloyd will have its ups and downs and like I said, I would be crazy to go all in on just one stock. But if I had to do it, this would be the one. The post If I could only save one UK share in my SIPP, here's what it would be appeared first on The Motley Fool UK. More reading 5 Stocks For Trying To Build Wealth After 50 One Top Growth Stock from the Motley Fool Harvey Jones has positions in 3i Group Plc, BAE Systems, Lloyds Banking Group Plc, M&g Plc, Phoenix Group Plc, and Rolls-Royce Plc. The Motley Fool UK has recommended BAE Systems, Lloyds Banking Group Plc, M&g Plc, National Grid Plc, Rolls-Royce Plc, and Unilever. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Motley Fool UK 2025 Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Police officer lists four problems with restaurant applying for drinks licence
An Indian restaurant owner faced objections from police and licensing officers for the second time in a matter of months after re-applying for a drinks licence for his business. Rafiqul Islam, 47, wants to serve alcohol from 10am to 11pm at Cardamom, in St James's Street, Brighton. He has not been legally able to do so since his licence lapsed. He previously applied for a licence until midnight every day but was turned down after a Brighton and Hove City Council licensing panel hearing in February. Mr Islam has since brought in a former colleague and more experienced licence holder, Szabolcs Veres, to work as the designated premises supervisor (DPS) with responsibility for alcohol sales. But at a licensing panel hearing before three councillors, Sussex Police licensing officer Mark Thorogood listed several issues with the premises since Mr Islam took over. These included The licence lapsing in October 2023 Alcohol was listed on the menu and a beer pump was still connected in November 2023 even though the premises no longer had a licence Trading outside permitted hours and with no functioning closed-circuit television (CCTV) in December 2023 The battery-operated CCTV was not working in December 2024 The panel was told that the incident log had not been signed off and staff had not received the training that they needed, the licence was found to have lapsed and Mr Islam was given a final warning. Conservative councillor Ivan Lyons asked what measures would give the police confidence to support Mr Islam's premises having a licence. Mr Thorogood said that there were none. He said: 'We have raised our concerns around a history of non-compliance and a new proposed DPS. 'We have spent a long time already trying to assist Mr Islam in adhering to the previous premises licences he has held but with no success.' Mr Thorogood said that the business was small and 'not challenging' but the various issues, including trading without a licence, meant that the force had lost confidence in Mr Islam. Council licensing officer Donna Lynsdale also said that she had no confidence in Mr Islam's ability to comply with any licence conditions. Ms Lynsdale said that she visited the business in February to ensure that no alcohol was on sale after the previous licence application was turned down. Although no alcoholic drinks were on display, they were still included in the menus on the counter. She said that Mr Islam called her for help with his new licence application and asked her to recommend someone who could help. Ms Lynsdale said: 'Mr Islam stated he believed the reason the last application was refused was because the committee did not like his legal representative. 'This clarifies that Mr Islam is not taking any responsibility for the previous issue – the breaches – or the poor running of the premises. 'Despite providing Mr islam with all the documents and assistance to comply with the previous premises licence, he continued to breach the conditions.' Mr Islam's solicitor, Nicholas Perkins, said that the business was small, with space for only 20 to 28 customers at a time, so it was not a 'challenging' restaurant. But it was in the centre of Brighton where there were restrictions on new alcohol licences because of the 'saturation' of licensed premises and the associated risks of crime and nuisance. Mr Perkins said that the site had been a restaurant for many years and would not be adding to the volume of similar businesses in the area. Without the licence, Mr Perkins said, his client would be 'financially ruined'. He said: 'You (the panel) should look at this whole situation afresh. Mr Islam has candidly admitted his failings but that does not mean he should not be given a further opportunity. 'The proposal before you is new, different and you could have confidence in it on the basis that Mr Veres is prepared to be the DPS. 'He's prepared to take the risk. He has the confidence that going forward these premises will operate correctly.' Labour councillor Paul Nann asked if conditions could include the number of hours that Mr Veres spent at the premises but he was told that this would not be possible. The panel – which also included Labour councillor Julie Cattel – retired to make its decision which should be made public within five working days.
