FPH vs TMHC

For growth investors, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the stronger pick with -0.

6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -53. 8% for Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH). Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) offers the better valuation at 7. 7x trailing P/E (11. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) a "Buy" — based on 30 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.

On trailing P/E, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the cheapest at 7.

7x versus Five Point Holdings, LLC at 10. 2x. On forward P/E, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation is actually cheaper at 11. 3x.

Over the past 5 years, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) delivered a total return of +85.

7%, compared to -34. 6% for Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TMHC returned +324. 9% versus FPH's -67. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

89β versus Taylor Morrison Home Corporation's 0. 92β — meaning TMHC is approximately 3% more volatile than FPH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 22% versus 37% for Taylor Morrison Home Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is pulling ahead at -0.

6% versus -53. 8% for Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Taylor Morrison Home Corporation grew EPS -6. 0% year-over-year, compared to -50. 0% for Five Point Holdings, LLC. Over a 3-year CAGR, FPH leads at 37. 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.

Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH) is the more profitable company, earning 64.

5% net margin versus 9. 6% for Taylor Morrison Home Corporation — meaning it keeps 64. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TMHC leads at 14. 0% versus -6. 7% for FPH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FPH leads at 48. 4%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) trades at 11.

3x forward P/E versus 16. 5x for Five Point Holdings, LLC — 5. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.

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.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Taylor Morrison Home Corporation (TMHC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

92), +324. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TMHC: +324. 9%, FPH: -67. 1%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (FPH (Real Estate) and TMHC (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

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.