REIT - Mortgage
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
EFC vs GPMT vs MFA vs BXMT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
REIT - Mortgage
REIT - Mortgage
REIT - Mortgage
EFC vs GPMT vs MFA vs BXMT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | REIT - Mortgage | REIT - Mortgage | REIT - Mortgage | REIT - Mortgage |
| Market Cap | $1.35B | $70M | $1.01B | $3.23B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $429M | $132M | $650M | $1.54B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $147M | $-40M | $135M | $104M |
| Gross Margin | 88.6% | 47.3% | 59.3% | 62.6% |
| Operating Margin | 63.0% | -4.3% | 41.0% | 58.3% |
| Forward P/E | 7.2x | — | 7.5x | 12.3x |
| Total Debt | $16.96B | $1.17B | $10.99B | $16.16B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $202M | $66M | $213M | $453M |
EFC vs GPMT vs MFA vs BXMT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ellington Financial… (EFC) | 100 | 133.5 | +33.5% |
| Granite Point Mortg… (GPMT) | 100 | 29.9 | -70.1% |
| MFA Financial, Inc. (MFA) | 100 | 146.4 | +46.4% |
| Blackstone Mortgage… (BXMT) | 100 | 81.1 | -18.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EFC vs GPMT vs MFA vs BXMT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EFC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 77.5% 10Y total return vs BXMT's 50.4%
- Lower P/E (7.2x vs 12.3x)
- 34.2% margin vs GPMT's -30.5%
- Beta 0.49 vs GPMT's 1.42
GPMT plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
MFA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.72, yield 18.1%
- Rev growth 213.0%, EPS growth 104.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.72, current ratio 2.18x
- Beta 0.72, yield 18.1%, current ratio 2.18x
BXMT lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 213.0% FFO/revenue growth vs BXMT's -14.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.2x vs 12.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 34.2% margin vs GPMT's -30.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.49 vs GPMT's 1.42 | |
| Dividends | 18.1% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs EFC's 13.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.7% vs GPMT's -23.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.1% ROA vs GPMT's -2.3%, ROIC 4.4% vs 2.6% |
EFC vs GPMT vs MFA vs BXMT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EFC leads in 3 of 6 categories
GPMT leads 2 • MFA leads 1 • BXMT leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EFC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BXMT is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.5B annually — 11.7x GPMT's $132M. EFC is the more profitable business, keeping 34.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GPMT's -30.5%. On growth, GPMT holds the edge at +157.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $429M | $132M | $650M | $1.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $301M | -$8M | $268M | $948M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $147M | -$40M | $135M | $104M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$925M | $463,000 | $91M | $335M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +88.6% | +47.3% | +59.3% | +62.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +63.0% | -4.3% | +41.0% | +58.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +34.2% | -30.5% | +20.7% | +6.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.2% | +0.4% | +14.0% | +21.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +123.0% | +157.8% | +118.9% | +4.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -44.0% | +40.9% | -103.0% | — |
Valuation Metrics
GPMT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 5.9x trailing earnings, MFA trades at a 80% valuation discount to BXMT's 29.9x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, BXMT's 16.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than EFC's 39.5x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.4B | $70M | $1.0B | $3.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $18.1B | $1.2B | $11.8B | $18.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 11.45x | -1.27x | 5.89x | 29.89x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.19x | — | 7.52x | 12.28x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.46x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 39.46x | 20.68x | 17.09x | 16.35x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.01x | 0.48x | 1.15x | 2.12x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.72x | 0.13x | 0.57x | 0.93x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.66x | 26.41x | 13.26x | 11.70x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GPMT leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
EFC delivers a 8.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $8 in annual profit, vs $-7 for GPMT. GPMT carries lower financial leverage with a 2.12x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EFC's 9.07x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), EFC scores 6/9 vs MFA's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.4% | -7.1% | +7.4% | +2.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.8% | -2.3% | +1.1% | +0.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.1% | +2.6% | +4.4% | +4.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.7% | +4.6% | +5.8% | +11.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 9.07x | 2.12x | 6.01x | 4.61x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $16.8B | $1.1B | $10.8B | $15.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $202M | $66M | $213M | $453M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $17.0B | $1.2B | $11.0B | $16.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.51x | 0.58x | 1.34x | 1.11x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EFC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EFC five years ago would be worth $12,367 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,518 for GPMT. Over the past 12 months, MFA leads with a +19.7% total return vs GPMT's -23.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EFC at 15.0% vs GPMT's -13.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +3.4% | -35.9% | +7.7% | +0.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +17.3% | -23.4% | +19.7% | +10.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +52.1% | -36.3% | +35.5% | +48.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +23.7% | -64.8% | +1.7% | -2.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +77.5% | -50.4% | +8.3% | +50.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +15.0% | -13.9% | +10.7% | +14.0% |
Risk & Volatility
EFC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EFC is the less volatile stock with a 0.49 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GPMT's 1.42 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EFC currently trades 96.5% from its 52-week high vs GPMT's 47.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.49x | 1.42x | 0.72x | 0.74x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $14.12 | $3.12 | $10.57 | $20.67 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.28 | $1.24 | $8.78 | $17.67 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.5% | +47.1% | +93.7% | +92.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.1 | 54.4 | 43.4 | 45.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.6M | 152K | 1.4M | 1.4M |
Analyst Outlook
MFA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EFC as "Buy", GPMT as "Hold", MFA as "Hold", BXMT as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 70.1% upside for GPMT (target: $3) vs -0.9% for EFC (target: $14). For income investors, MFA offers the higher dividend yield at 18.08% vs BXMT's 9.87%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $13.50 | $2.50 | $10.25 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 12 | 23 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +13.6% | +14.7% | +18.1% | +9.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.85 | $0.22 | $1.79 | $1.89 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +8.0% | +1.5% | +3.4% |
EFC leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). GPMT leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency).
EFC vs GPMT vs MFA vs BXMT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MFA Financial, Inc.
(MFA) is the stronger pick with 213. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -14. 0% for Blackstone Mortgage Trust, Inc. (BXMT). MFA Financial, Inc. (MFA) offers the better valuation at 5. 9x trailing P/E (7. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ellington Financial Inc. (EFC) a "Buy" — based on 13 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT?
On trailing P/E, MFA Financial, Inc.
(MFA) is the cheapest at 5. 9x versus Blackstone Mortgage Trust, Inc. at 29. 9x. On forward P/E, Ellington Financial Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT?
Over the past 5 years, Ellington Financial Inc.
(EFC) delivered a total return of +23. 7%, compared to -64. 8% for Granite Point Mortgage Trust Inc. (GPMT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EFC returned +77. 5% versus GPMT's -50. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Ellington Financial Inc.
(EFC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 49β versus Granite Point Mortgage Trust Inc. 's 1. 42β — meaning GPMT is approximately 190% more volatile than EFC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Granite Point Mortgage Trust Inc. (GPMT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 9% for Ellington Financial Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MFA Financial, Inc.
(MFA) is pulling ahead at 213. 0% versus -14. 0% for Blackstone Mortgage Trust, Inc. (BXMT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Blackstone Mortgage Trust, Inc. grew EPS 154. 7% year-over-year, compared to -12. 5% for Ellington Financial Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, EFC leads at 150. 0% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT?
Ellington Financial Inc.
(EFC) is the more profitable company, earning 21. 8% net margin versus -28. 3% for Granite Point Mortgage Trust Inc. — meaning it keeps 21. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MFA leads at 78. 8% versus 43. 6% for GPMT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MFA leads at 96. 2%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Ellington Financial Inc.
(EFC) trades at 7. 2x forward P/E versus 12. 3x for Blackstone Mortgage Trust, Inc. — 5. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GPMT: 70. 1% to $2. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
MFA Financial, Inc. (MFA) offers the highest yield at 18. 1%, versus 9. 9% for Blackstone Mortgage Trust, Inc. (BXMT).
09Is EFC or GPMT or MFA or BXMT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Ellington Financial Inc.
(EFC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 49), 13. 6% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (EFC: +77. 5%, GPMT: -50. 4%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between EFC and GPMT and MFA and BXMT?
Both stocks operate in the Real Estate sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: EFC is a small-cap high-growth stock; GPMT is a small-cap high-growth stock; MFA is a small-cap high-growth stock; BXMT is a small-cap income-oriented stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.