I remember when I first began investing in the mid-1990s that Merck (NYSE:MRK) was a no-brainer core holding. The company was a world-class brand name with tons of money and great pharmaceuticals. Then, one day, I read an article in The New York Times about how many of Merck’s drugs were coming off-patent and the pipeline was weak. I sold the next day and never looked back.

Outside of a brief period thereafter, Merck stock never has come close to where I sold it. The stock trades at $32. The last time it saw $40 was early last year. And the $60 threshold is ancient history — eight years ago.

There still is no reason to hold Merck today.

The company was in such dire straits that it had to purchase Schering-Plough to complement its own business. Gigantic mergers like this happen when an industry is mature and growth has stagnated. Sure, there’s always the possibility for a blockbuster drug that will come along, but when there are so many other companies out there that actually have those drugs, why bother with Merck?

I’m all for the Peter Lynch stalwart, but Merck doesn’t even qualify. Revenue growth this year is expected to be a measly 3.6%, and it’s actually expected to be down 1.3% next year. Earnings this year seem okay at 8.5% growth, but much of this is attributable to its massive share buyback program. And next year? Sheesh — only 3% earnings growth, probably all from the buyback. The five-year annualized projected growth rate is not impressive, at only 4.54%.

Yet for some crazy reason, the stock trades at almost nine times current-year earnings — twice the growth rate, giving it a price/earnings-to-growth ratio of 2. Even that is overpriced in my eyes for a no-growth behemoth. Some might say the company deserves a premium multiple. After all, it sits on $12.2 billion in cash, offset by $15.4 billion in cheap debt, and the company generates a good $3 billion in annual free cash flow. This is all fine, and it’s good to know Merck isn’t going to go bankrupt. But all I can think is, “Who cares?” The company isn’t growing, so neither will the P/E multiple nor the stock price.

Some retirement-minded folks might argue that the company pays a 4.8% dividend. Like AT&T (NYSE:T), it might not be growing, but the dividend is solid. That’s true, but Merck is overvalued to me, and the fact its stock price has fallen during the past decade by 65% tells me there actually is a risk to capital, as the stock should be trading at around $20.

I say that Merck stock will make you sick. Sell now and find greener pastures.

Disclosure: Lawrence Meyers does not hold shares of Merck or AT&T.