WPP’s dividend performance has recently fired up to 9% and is now the highest on FTSE 100. But over the years of investing, I have learned that prosecution of high profitability can sometimes cause more harm than good. Concentration on complete returns – a combination of stock prices and dividends – usually is much more critical in the long run.

This is why FTSE 100 Dividend participation as Shell (LSE: Shel) can be a better option to consider.

Low performance, high total return

Shell may not turn your head with the current dividend performance of just over 4%. But the appearance below the surface, and its long -term history of complete return is convincing. Over the past five years, the price of the energy giant shares has increased by 105%, which means annual returns of 15% per year.

Add performance and we look at the fleshy 19% total return.

Impact on constantly growing dividends-about 5% a year after postpandemice-the total return is even more attractive.

In addition, it looks balanced. Last year, he attracted £ 38 billion in operational cash flows, supporting a solid balance, which reveals the debt approximately half of their own capital. And the payment factor is a comfortable 63%, which suggests a lot of space to maintain dividends, even if the earnings are falling.

Of course, investing in oil directions has a known risk. One of them is the threat of a decrease in long -term demand when the world goes to renewable energy sources. The next is geopolitical instability – Shell’s global operations expose it to everything, from sanctions to production cuts that could charge profits.

Despite this, except for the next pandemic shock, I think Shell looks good to deliver income seekers. Its moderate performance, combined with a long -term price boost, is a powerful combination of connection.

High performance and low total return

Now take WPP, a global advertising giant. On paper, its high dividend performance looks delicious, but they dig a little deeper, and the image changes.

The price of the shares has dropped by about 30% in five years, and now it trades close to the lowest level in over 15 years. Even with this mighty dividend, investors would be tough to break even during this period.

The low valuation is also attractive-the price-profit ratio (P/E) is only 8.4, while the price for sale (P/s) is 0.32. But it can be a classic “value trap”: a supply that seems economical, but is still sliding down, removing the benefits of high withdrawal.

And although the dividend is well covered with earnings, it has not increased in the last two years. Plus his debt pile of 6.35 billion GBP is almost twice as high.

In my opinion, it is simply not convincing enough to consider alone on the basis of high performance. Before making a decision, I would have to see mighty evidence for a real strategy of change.

Performance is only one piece of the puzzle

This comparison emphasizes why I always look at the dividend performance with the total return potential. 4% Efficiency supported by a mighty company and a growing price of shares can provide much more wealth in decades than 8% income related to a fighting company.

In the case of investors pursuing passive income, focusing on quality and sustainable growth will almost always pay off, than just hunting for the highest performance in the board.