I’ve been spending time in Baltimore with my three nephews ages 5, 3½, and 1½. Although I visit here and there, I always face a bit of a learning curve when I’m in town. My brother’s house is the complete opposite of my minimalist approach. I’m finally proficient with the baby gate at the top of the stairs and getting them buckled into car seats.
According to Lending Tree, it costs $297,674 to raise a child to age 18. The global kids apparel market was valued at $225.8 billion in 2025 with a projected compound annual growth rate of 7.25% through 2034. And the global toys market is worth over $316 billion annually.
So, you know I went digging for dividend payers in those spaces.
Unfortunately, I found a solid list of companies with suspended or reduced dividends. It included The Children’s Place (PLCE), Disney (DIS), Mattel (MAT), and Carters (CRI). However, the search did put two stocks back on my radar.
Two Interesting Watch List Additions
The first one is quite familiar to my three nephews. Hasbro (HAS) is the parent company of Nerf, Marvel, and Play-Doh. Its games division includes one of our favorites: Don’t Break the Ice. HAS hasn’t appeared in any of my stock screeners recently, so I was surprised to see that shares are up 51% over the past year.
A quick look at earnings shows a negative payout ratio, and its GAAP loss is a result of numerous write-downs and impairments. Looking closer, the company hit a record $1.1 billion in adjusted operating profit for the full-year 2025. Revenues were up 14% as well.
I was shocked to find that role-playing, trading card studio Wizards of the Coast, and digital gaming generate over 80% of Hasbro’s operating profit. I don’t want to add a gaming company to my portfolio, especially one with just a 3% annual yield.
The second is a company I’ve been fascinated with for years, but is haunted by debt from a past acquisition. Newell Brands (NWL) is the parent company of a number of household brands, including Rubbermaid, Sharpie, Coleman, Yankee Candle, and Sunbeam. It also owns car seat and stroller brands Graco and Baby Jogger.
I would love to have exposure to all these brands. They continue to be purchased by loyal customers. However, it’s been downhill since the deal in 2016 that combined Newell, Rubbermaid, and Jarden Corp.
The brands never fully integrated and the company eventually cut its dividend in 2023 as liquidity concerns remained across the balance sheet. Margin improvement and management optimism are not enough to offset the dwindling gross profit.
This is one of those stocks that I revisit once a year to see if a turnaround might ever be viable. Ten years later, I’m still not convinced.
Sticking with Consumer Staples
Although I didn’t find a viable investment specific to the children’s market, I’ll still get exposure through large companies with sizable sales in that sector.
Target Corp. (TGT) reported that its toys segment was among the departments with net sales growth during the fourth quarter. On top of that, its in-house apparel brand, Cat & Jack, generates $3 billion in annual sales. The company’s progress over the past few years to improve its digital channels make it a one-stop shop for busy families.
Remember, the company is still in a strategic transition phase with some uncertainty, but markets are seeing signs of a turnaround. Shares are up 30% over the past six months and are now slightly above my buy-up-to price needed to grab a 4% yield.
Other ways to get exposure would be Kimberly-Clark (KMB) and Kenvue (KVUE). KMB is a giant in the diaper business with its Huggies, Pull-Ups, and Goodnites brands. KVUE is found in bathroom cabinets all over the world, with the majority of its brands offering specific products for kids.
I lumped these two together because KMB will be acquiring KVUE later this year. The combined powerhouse company should continue to pay a solid dividend for many decades to come.
I am always on the lookout for markets with staying power as we march into the future. The children’s market is a great example. Maybe by 2030, we’ll see some of those cut or suspended dividends back on the table. But for now, consumer staples exposure will have to do.
For more income, now and in the future,
Kelly Green
Originally published March 25, 2026
For more news, information, and strategy, visit ETF Trends.
Facts Only
The cost to raise a child to age 18 is estimated at $297,674 according to Lending Tree.
The global kids apparel market was valued at $225.8 billion in 2025, with a projected 7.25% annual growth rate through 2034.
The global toys market is worth over $316 billion annually.
Companies with suspended or reduced dividends include The Children’s Place (PLCE), Disney (DIS), Mattel (MAT), and Carters (CRI).
Hasbro (HAS) owns brands like Nerf, Marvel, Play-Doh, and Don’t Break the Ice, with shares up 51% over the past year.
Hasbro reported a record $1.1 billion in adjusted operating profit for 2025, with revenues up 14%.
Wizards of the Coast and digital gaming generate over 80% of Hasbro’s operating profit.
Newell Brands (NWL) owns brands like Rubbermaid, Sharpie, Coleman, Graco, and Baby Jogger.
Newell Brands cut its dividend in 2023 due to liquidity concerns and debt from a 2016 acquisition.
Target Corp. (TGT) reported growth in its toys segment and generates $3 billion annually from its Cat & Jack apparel brand.
Target’s shares are up 30% over the past six months.
Kimberly-Clark (KMB) owns diaper brands Huggies, Pull-Ups, and Goodnites.
Kenvue (KVUE) will be acquired by Kimberly-Clark later in 2026.
The analysis was originally published on March 25, 2026.
Executive Summary
The analysis explores investment opportunities in the children's market, highlighting the financial scale of raising children and the growth of related industries like apparel and toys. The author examines dividend-paying companies in these sectors, noting that several, including The Children’s Place, Disney, Mattel, and Carters, have suspended or reduced dividends. Two companies, Hasbro and Newell Brands, are evaluated as potential investments. Hasbro, despite a 51% stock increase over the past year, relies heavily on gaming profits, which the author finds unappealing. Newell Brands, burdened by debt from a 2016 acquisition, remains a speculative turnaround candidate. The author ultimately favors consumer staples like Target, Kimberly-Clark, and Kenvue for broader exposure to the children's market, citing their stable dividends and market presence. The piece concludes with cautious optimism about future dividend recoveries in the sector while emphasizing current opportunities in established consumer brands.
The narrative balances market data with personal anecdotes, acknowledging both the challenges and potential in investing in child-focused industries. It presents a pragmatic approach, favoring stability over speculative bets, while leaving room for future reassessment as market conditions evolve.
Full Take
The strongest version of this narrative presents a pragmatic investment strategy in the children's market, acknowledging both the sector's financial scale and the risks of dividend instability. The author deserves credit for transparently evaluating companies like Hasbro and Newell Brands, highlighting their strengths (e.g., Hasbro's revenue growth) while critiquing their weaknesses (e.g., debt burdens, reliance on gaming). The piece avoids emotional appeals, focusing instead on data-driven analysis and personal experience to ground the discussion.
Pattern scan: The narrative avoids overt manipulation, but there’s a subtle framing of consumer staples as the "safer" choice, which could reflect a broader bias toward stability over growth. This isn’t necessarily misleading, but it’s worth noting the implicit assumption that dividend reliability outweighs potential upside in riskier plays. No overt distortion or bad faith is detected, though the dismissal of gaming as an investment theme might overlook its long-term viability.
Root cause: The paradigm here is one of risk aversion in a volatile market, echoing post-2008 financial caution. The unstated assumption is that consumer staples are inherently more resilient, which may not account for disruptive innovation in child-focused industries (e.g., digital toys, sustainable apparel).
Implications: For human agency, this narrative empowers investors to make informed choices but may inadvertently discourage exploration of higher-risk, higher-reward opportunities. The beneficiaries are likely conservative investors, while the costs are borne by those seeking aggressive growth. Second-order consequences could include reduced capital flow to innovative but unproven companies in the children's sector.
Bridge questions: What if gaming becomes a dominant force in children's entertainment, making Hasbro’s pivot strategic rather than risky? How might climate change or regulatory shifts (e.g., toy safety laws) reshape the market’s stability assumptions? What would it take for Newell Brands to successfully integrate its acquisitions and restore its dividend?
Counterstrike scan: A coordinated influence campaign might exaggerate the risks of non-staple investments to steer capital toward established players, but this piece doesn’t match that pattern. It presents a balanced view, with critiques of both high-risk and conservative options. The analysis aligns more with independent financial journalism than a manipulative playbook.
Patterns detected: none