Real Estate - Development
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FOR vs LGIH vs GRBK vs TMHC vs SKY
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Residential Construction
Residential Construction
Residential Construction
Residential Construction
FOR vs LGIH vs GRBK vs TMHC vs SKY — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Real Estate - Development | Residential Construction | Residential Construction | Residential Construction | Residential Construction |
| Market Cap | $1.39B | $1.07B | $2.83B | $5.56B | $4.05B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.71B | $1.67B | $2.10B | $7.61B | $2.64B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $167M | $71M | $313M | $672M | $214M |
| Gross Margin | 21.3% | 20.3% | 30.5% | 22.4% | 26.3% |
| Operating Margin | 12.3% | 4.7% | 19.5% | 13.2% | 9.8% |
| Forward P/E | 9.2x | 16.6x | 11.0x | 11.2x | 19.4x |
| Total Debt | $817M | $1.66B | $335M | $2.36B | $131M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $379M | $61M | $191M | $851M | $610M |
FOR vs LGIH vs GRBK vs TMHC vs SKY — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Forestar Group Inc. (FOR) | 100 | 179.7 | +79.7% |
| LGI Homes, Inc. (LGIH) | 100 | 55.5 | -44.5% |
| Green Brick Partner… (GRBK) | 100 | 613.8 | +513.8% |
| Taylor Morrison Hom… (TMHC) | 100 | 307.7 | +207.7% |
| Champion Homes, Inc. (SKY) | 100 | 295.0 | +195.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FOR vs LGIH vs GRBK vs TMHC vs SKY
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FOR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +39.4% vs SKY's -16.3%
Among these 5 stocks, LGIH doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
GRBK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 1.06, yield 0.1%
- 7.4% 10Y total return vs SKY's 7.1%
- 14.9% margin vs LGIH's 4.2%
- 0.1% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
TMHC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.92, Low D/E 37.4%, current ratio 6.24x
- PEG 0.34 vs SKY's 0.71
- Beta 0.92, current ratio 6.24x
- Lower P/E (11.2x vs 19.4x), PEG 0.34 vs 0.71
SKY is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 22.7%, EPS growth 35.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.0%
- 22.7% revenue growth vs LGIH's -22.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 22.7% revenue growth vs LGIH's -22.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.2x vs 19.4x), PEG 0.34 vs 0.71 | |
| Quality / Margins | 14.9% margin vs LGIH's 4.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.92 vs LGIH's 1.70, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.1% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +39.4% vs SKY's -16.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.0% ROA vs LGIH's 1.8%, ROIC 15.4% vs 1.7% |
FOR vs LGIH vs GRBK vs TMHC vs SKY — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FOR vs LGIH vs GRBK vs TMHC vs SKY — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TMHC leads in 1 of 6 categories
SKY leads 1 • FOR leads 1 • GRBK leads 1 • LGIH leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — FOR and GRBK each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TMHC is the larger business by revenue, generating $7.6B annually — 4.5x LGIH's $1.7B. GRBK is the more profitable business, keeping 14.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LGIH's 4.2%. On growth, FOR holds the edge at +6.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.7B | $1.7B | $2.1B | $7.6B | $2.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $213M | $82M | $415M | $1.0B | $306M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $167M | $71M | $313M | $672M | $214M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $266M | -$69M | $208M | $710M | $260M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.3% | +20.3% | +30.5% | +22.4% | +26.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.3% | +4.7% | +19.5% | +13.2% | +9.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +9.8% | +4.2% | +14.9% | +8.8% | +8.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +15.5% | -4.1% | +9.9% | +9.3% | +9.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.6% | -9.0% | -2.6% | -26.8% | +1.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.6% | -47.1% | -22.9% | -51.2% | -3.0% |
Valuation Metrics
TMHC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.7x trailing earnings, TMHC trades at a 64% valuation discount to SKY's 21.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TMHC offers better value at 0.23x vs SKY's 0.78x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.4B | $1.1B | $2.8B | $5.6B | $4.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.8B | $2.7B | $3.0B | $7.1B | $3.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 8.29x | 14.84x | 9.29x | 7.65x | 21.43x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.22x | 16.56x | 10.98x | 11.22x | 19.44x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.39x | — | 0.36x | 0.23x | 0.78x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.59x | 31.71x | 7.19x | 6.18x | 12.69x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.83x | 0.63x | 1.35x | 0.68x | 1.63x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.78x | 0.51x | 1.49x | 0.95x | 2.76x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 13.60x | 6.88x | 21.29x |
Profitability & Efficiency
SKY leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GRBK delivers a 17.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $3 for LGIH. SKY carries lower financial leverage with a 0.08x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LGIH's 0.79x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SKY scores 7/9 vs FOR's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.5% | +3.4% | +17.0% | +10.8% | +13.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.3% | +1.8% | +13.0% | +6.9% | +10.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.8% | +1.7% | +15.4% | +11.0% | +16.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.2% | +2.1% | +19.1% | +13.2% | +14.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.46x | 0.79x | 0.17x | 0.37x | 0.08x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $438M | $1.6B | $144M | $1.5B | -$479M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $379M | $61M | $191M | $851M | $610M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $817M | $1.7B | $335M | $2.4B | $131M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | — | 19.94x | 51.32x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FOR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GRBK five years ago would be worth $25,408 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,525 for LGIH. Over the past 12 months, FOR leads with a +39.4% total return vs SKY's -16.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FOR at 11.2% vs LGIH's -26.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.1% | +11.0% | +3.9% | +1.1% | -13.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +39.4% | -14.5% | +10.5% | +2.0% | -16.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +37.4% | -60.2% | +31.2% | +37.4% | -2.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.0% | -74.8% | +154.1% | +85.7% | +64.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +118.1% | +56.4% | +742.1% | +321.2% | +714.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +11.2% | -26.4% | +9.5% | +11.2% | -0.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FOR and TMHC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TMHC is the less volatile stock with a 0.92 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LGIH's 1.70 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FOR currently trades 88.7% from its 52-week high vs LGIH's 66.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.14x | 1.70x | 1.06x | 0.92x | 0.96x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $30.74 | $69.50 | $80.97 | $72.50 | $99.17 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $18.50 | $33.59 | $56.85 | $54.58 | $59.44 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +88.7% | +66.6% | +81.1% | +82.0% | +73.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 52.5 | 56.3 | 47.0 | 49.0 | 46.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 134K | 490K | 200K | 1.1M | 500K |
Analyst Outlook
GRBK leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FOR as "Buy", LGIH as "Buy", GRBK as "Hold", TMHC as "Buy", SKY as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 91.8% upside for LGIH (target: $89) vs 4.1% for FOR (target: $28).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $28.38 | $88.80 | — | $73.75 | $106.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 13 | 11 | 30 | 8 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.1% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.07 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | 0.0% | +3.0% | +6.9% | +2.0% |
TMHC leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). SKY leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
FOR vs LGIH vs GRBK vs TMHC vs SKY: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Champion Homes, Inc.
(SKY) is the stronger pick with 22. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -22. 6% for LGI Homes, Inc. (LGIH). Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) offers the better valuation at 7. 7x trailing P/E (11. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Forestar Group Inc. (FOR) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY?
On trailing P/E, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the cheapest at 7.
7x versus Champion Homes, Inc. at 21. 4x. On forward P/E, Forestar Group Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Taylor Morrison Home Corporation wins at 0. 34x versus Champion Homes, Inc. 's 0. 71x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY?
Over the past 5 years, Green Brick Partners, Inc.
(GRBK) delivered a total return of +154. 1%, compared to -74. 8% for LGI Homes, Inc. (LGIH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GRBK returned +742. 1% versus LGIH's +56. 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 — FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
92β versus LGI Homes, Inc. 's 1. 70β — meaning LGIH is approximately 84% more volatile than TMHC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Champion Homes, Inc. (SKY) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 8% versus 79% for LGI Homes, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Champion Homes, Inc.
(SKY) is pulling ahead at 22. 7% versus -22. 6% for LGI Homes, Inc. (LGIH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Champion Homes, Inc. grew EPS 35. 2% year-over-year, compared to -62. 4% for LGI Homes, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GRBK leads at 6. 1% 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 — FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY?
Green Brick Partners, Inc.
(GRBK) is the more profitable company, earning 14. 9% net margin versus 4. 3% for LGI Homes, Inc. — meaning it keeps 14. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GRBK leads at 19. 5% versus 4. 7% for LGIH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GRBK leads at 30. 3%, 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 FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 34x versus Champion Homes, Inc. 's 0. 71x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Forestar Group Inc. (FOR) trades at 9. 2x forward P/E versus 19. 4x for Champion Homes, Inc. — 10. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LGIH: 91. 8% to $88. 80.
08Which pays a better dividend — FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is FOR or LGIH or GRBK or TMHC or SKY better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Champion Homes, Inc.
(SKY) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 96), +714. 5% 10Y return). LGI Homes, Inc. (LGIH) carries a higher beta of 1. 70 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SKY: +714. 5%, LGIH: +56. 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 FOR and LGIH and GRBK and TMHC and SKY?
These companies operate in different sectors (FOR (Real Estate) and LGIH (Consumer Cyclical) and GRBK (Consumer Cyclical) and TMHC (Consumer Cyclical) and SKY (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: FOR is a small-cap deep-value stock; LGIH is a small-cap deep-value stock; GRBK is a small-cap deep-value stock; TMHC is a small-cap deep-value stock; SKY is a small-cap high-growth 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.