可口可樂十年回報中有多少來自股息？

Python for programmers, prompts for data analysts.

In the last part we rebuilt Apple's adjusted close from raw prices, one split and 31 dividends, and matched EODHD to the fourth decimal. Dividends turned out to be a small part of Apple's
story. Over almost eight years they added 47 percentage points to a return of 817%.

At the end I promised to run the same recipe on a company where the dividend is the main story. Coca-Cola is the obvious choice. It has raised its dividend every year for decades, and the
payout is several times larger than Apple's, relative to the price.

So the question for this part is simple: over ten years, how much of a Coca-Cola investor's return came from the price, and how much from the dividends?

Want to try this yourself? The EODHD MCP Server is what pulled the data in this article — connect it to Claude and ask your own questions
(affiliate link).

New here? The Setup covers everything you need before your first prompt.

The ingredients again

Same three ingredients as last time: the prices as they actually traded, every split, every dividend.

🟧 PROMPT

Use the eodhd MCP to get Coca-Cola's raw daily
closing prices for the last ten years, plus every
stock split and every dividend in that period.

From October 28, 2016 to October 28, 2026 there are 2,513 trading days. Coca-Cola didn't split its stock in that period. It paid 40 quarterly dividends, rising from $0.35 per share in
November 2016 to $0.53 in September 2026. The raw close was $42.23 at the start and $91.73 at the end.

No split makes this recipe simpler than Apple's. There is no second dividend size to trip over: for every one of the 40 payments, value and unadjustedValue are the same number.

The dividend went up every year, from $1.48 a year at the start to $2.12 now. Yet the yield fell, from about 3.5% of the price to about 2.3%. Both are true at once, because the price grew
faster than the dividend.

The raw prices passed the same check as Apple's: all 2,513 closes have at most two decimals, as a real exchange quotes them.

Three ways to count the same ten years

The recipe is the one from Part 36: walk backwards from today, and at each dividend scale every earlier price by (1 − dividend ÷ previous day's close).

🟧 PROMPT

Rebuild Coca-Cola's adjusted close from those raw
prices and dividends, the same way as for Apple,
and compare it with EODHD's adjusted close. Then
tell me the ten-year return three ways: price
only, price plus the dividends kept as cash, and
with every dividend reinvested.

The rebuilt series matches EODHD's adjusted close on all 2,513 days, within 0.0002%. The three returns:

The middle row is the one I hadn't thought about before. Over ten years Coca-Cola paid $17.48 per share in dividends, 41% of the starting price. Kept in a drawer, that cash adds 41
percentage points. Reinvested, the same dividends add 79. The extra 38 points come from the shares that earlier dividends bought, which then paid dividends of their own.

So reinvested dividends made up 79 of the 196 percentage points, or 40% of the total return. That's the "other 40%" in the title.

Apple and Coca-Cola side by side

Put the two parts next to each other, and the difference is hard to miss.

🟧 PROMPT

Compare what dividends added for Apple in Part 36
with what they added for Coca-Cola here. Why is
the share so different?

For Apple, from January 2019 to October 2026, the price alone rose 770.0% and the total return was 817.4%. Dividends added 47.5 percentage points, about 6% of the total. For Coca-Cola,
over ten years, the price rose 117.2% and the total return was 196.2%. Dividends added 79 points, 40% of the total.

Two things decide the share. The first is the dividend yield: Apple paid out around one percent of its price a year or less, Coca-Cola about three percent. The second is how fast the
price grew. Apple's price grew so fast that even a growing dividend stayed a small part of the story. Coca-Cola's price grew slowly and steadily, so the dividends had room to matter.

The two periods aren't the same length, so this isn't a race between the two stocks. It's a lesson about charts.

For Apple, a price chart tells almost the whole story. For Coca-Cola, a price chart leaves out 40% of what an investor actually got. Compare a growth stock with a dividend stock on price
charts alone, and the dividend stock looks worse than it was. The fair comparison is total return against total return, which is exactly what the adjusted close gives you.

A word of honesty

Taxes come first. The 196% assumes every dollar of dividend was reinvested. A real investor outside the US loses part of each dividend to US withholding tax before it arrives: for a Czech
investor that is usually 15% with the right form filed, 30% without it, and there may be more to pay at home. With 15% withheld, the total return over these ten years drops by about 13
percentage points; with 30%, by about 26. The price return doesn't change. Taxes hit exactly the part this article is about.

I picked Coca-Cola because it is famous for its dividend. That makes it a good example, not a typical stock. Many companies pay no dividend at all, and some cut theirs when times are hard.

The window matters too. Coca-Cola's price rose sharply in 2026. Measured to the first trading day of 2026 instead, the price was up 64%, the total return 118%, and dividends made up 46% of
it, not 40%. Move the start or the end, and the share moves with it.

And the rebuild assumes reinvestment at the close before each ex-dividend date, with no fees and fractional shares allowed. Other reasonable conventions give slightly different totals, by
less than a percentage point here. Not investment advice.

Final Thoughts

This is the thirty-seventh article in the series Unlock Real-Time Market Intelligence with EODHD and Claude, and the fourth about the adjusted close, after Parts 33, 35 and 36. Part 36 showed how to rebuild it. This part
showed what it hides.

Here's what came out: over ten years, 40% of a Coca-Cola investor's return came from dividends, not from the price. For Apple it was about 6%. The same recipe, the same day-by-day
check against EODHD, and a very different answer, because one company returns its profits as dividends and the other mostly doesn't.

So when you compare stocks, compare total returns. A price chart is fine for a stock that pays little. For a dividend payer, it leaves out a large part of the result.

Next time I want to take up an idea a reader, Arhan Canli, suggested after Part 36. EODHD's dividend records also carry the date each dividend was announced, not only the date it was paid.
That makes it possible to rebuild the adjusted close as it was known on any given day, using only the dividends announced by then. It's the version a backtest should use, and it's easy to
get wrong.

If this made you curious, the MCP Server is free to try — The Setup walks you through it.

← Part 36: Rebuild It Yourself: Adjusted Prices from Raw Prices, Splits and Dividends