REIT - Specialty
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FPI vs IIPR vs SAFE vs LAND vs PINE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
REIT - Industrial
REIT - Diversified
REIT - Industrial
REIT - Retail
FPI vs IIPR vs SAFE vs LAND vs PINE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | REIT - Specialty | REIT - Industrial | REIT - Diversified | REIT - Industrial | REIT - Retail |
| Market Cap | $462M | $1.62B | $1.11B | $354M | $281M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $54M | $263M | $386M | $76M | $65M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $30M | $120M | $114M | $-10M | $-415K |
| Gross Margin | 78.7% | 60.3% | 97.7% | 87.4% | -4.1% |
| Operating Margin | 45.6% | 46.7% | 39.8% | 78.6% | 28.0% |
| Forward P/E | 49.6x | 13.2x | 9.1x | — | 59.3x |
| Total Debt | $161M | $394M | $4.49B | $0.00 | $394M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $9M | $48M | $22M | $27M | $5M |
FPI vs IIPR vs SAFE vs LAND vs PINE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Farmland Partners I… (FPI) | 100 | 153.4 | +53.4% |
| Innovative Industri… (IIPR) | 100 | 69.3 | -30.7% |
| Safehold Inc. (SAFE) | 100 | 28.1 | -71.9% |
| Gladstone Land Corp… (LAND) | 100 | 67.2 | -32.8% |
| Alpine Income Prope… (PINE) | 100 | 158.8 | +58.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FPI vs IIPR vs SAFE vs LAND vs PINE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FPI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.56, Low D/E 30.0%, current ratio 537.08x
- Beta 0.56, yield 11.7%, current ratio 537.08x
- 56.0% margin vs LAND's -13.8%
IIPR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 9 yrs, beta 0.92, yield 13.5%
- 436.4% 10Y total return vs PINE's 38.3%
- 13.5% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs FPI's 11.7%
- 5.1% ROA vs LAND's -0.8%, ROIC 4.3% vs 4.9%
SAFE is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 5.4%, EPS growth 7.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 12.6%
- PEG 1.44 vs IIPR's 3.52
- Lower P/E (9.1x vs 59.3x)
Among these 5 stocks, LAND doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PINE carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth and stability.
- 15.9% FFO/revenue growth vs IIPR's -13.8%
- Beta 0.33 vs SAFE's 0.96, lower leverage
- +37.3% vs SAFE's +1.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 15.9% FFO/revenue growth vs IIPR's -13.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.1x vs 59.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 56.0% margin vs LAND's -13.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs SAFE's 0.96, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 13.5% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs FPI's 11.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +37.3% vs SAFE's +1.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.1% ROA vs LAND's -0.8%, ROIC 4.3% vs 4.9% |
FPI vs IIPR vs SAFE vs LAND vs PINE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
FPI vs IIPR vs SAFE vs LAND vs PINE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IIPR leads in 2 of 6 categories
PINE leads 2 • LAND leads 1 • SAFE leads 1 • FPI leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LAND leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SAFE is the larger business by revenue, generating $386M annually — 7.2x FPI's $54M. FPI is the more profitable business, keeping 56.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LAND's -13.8%. On growth, LAND holds the edge at +38.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $54M | $263M | $386M | $76M | $65M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $28M | $197M | $163M | $94M | $45M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $30M | $120M | $114M | -$10M | -$415,000 |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $19M | $144M | $48M | $5M | -$46M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +78.7% | +60.3% | +97.7% | +87.4% | -4.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +45.6% | +46.7% | +39.8% | +78.6% | +28.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +56.0% | +45.6% | +29.7% | -13.8% | -0.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +35.9% | +54.7% | +12.4% | +6.2% | -71.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -1.5% | -3.8% | +6.5% | +38.6% | +29.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -64.2% | -1.0% | +8.3% | +66.7% | +185.7% |
Valuation Metrics
SAFE leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.7x trailing earnings, SAFE trades at a 43% valuation discount to FPI's 17.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), SAFE offers better value at 1.53x vs IIPR's 3.85x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $462M | $1.6B | $1.1B | $354M | $281M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $614M | $2.0B | $5.6B | $327M | $671M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 17.07x | 14.40x | 9.70x | -33.62x | -89.27x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 49.62x | 13.17x | 9.09x | — | 59.32x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 3.85x | 1.53x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.54x | 9.91x | 17.64x | 3.46x | 14.63x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 8.85x | 6.08x | 2.87x | 4.65x | 4.65x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.01x | 0.87x | 0.45x | 0.53x | 1.01x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 26.50x | 9.26x | 23.16x | 50.62x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
IIPR leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IIPR delivers a 6.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-2 for LAND. IIPR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SAFE's 1.84x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FPI scores 6/9 vs PINE's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.7% | +6.4% | +4.7% | -1.6% | -0.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.1% | +5.1% | +1.6% | -0.8% | -0.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.4% | +4.3% | +3.4% | +4.9% | +2.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.0% | +5.8% | +4.4% | +4.7% | +2.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.30x | 0.21x | 1.84x | — | 1.31x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $152M | $346M | $4.5B | -$27M | $390M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $9M | $48M | $22M | $27M | $5M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $161M | $394M | $4.5B | $0 | $394M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.34x | 6.67x | 1.57x | 2.99x | 0.82x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PINE leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PINE five years ago would be worth $14,124 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,904 for SAFE. Over the past 12 months, PINE leads with a +37.3% total return vs SAFE's +1.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PINE at 13.6% vs SAFE's -14.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +11.0% | +18.3% | +14.4% | +8.8% | +18.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +10.3% | +20.3% | +1.1% | +11.2% | +37.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +19.0% | +14.1% | -37.3% | -27.5% | +46.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -8.7% | -50.0% | -71.0% | -43.8% | +41.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +29.7% | +436.4% | -50.3% | +42.9% | +38.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +6.0% | +4.5% | -14.4% | -10.2% | +13.6% |
Risk & Volatility
PINE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PINE is the less volatile stock with a 0.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SAFE's 0.96 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PINE currently trades 94.4% from its 52-week high vs LAND's 75.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.56x | 0.92x | 0.96x | 0.68x | 0.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $13.23 | $61.40 | $17.16 | $13.00 | $20.80 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $9.37 | $44.58 | $12.76 | $8.47 | $13.10 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +80.0% | +92.2% | +89.9% | +75.0% | +94.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 33.1 | 59.3 | 49.8 | 41.0 | 54.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 394K | 303K | 333K | 543K | 176K |
Analyst Outlook
IIPR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FPI as "Hold", IIPR as "Hold", SAFE as "Buy", LAND as "Buy", PINE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 60.6% upside for FPI (target: $17) vs -22.3% for IIPR (target: $44). For income investors, IIPR offers the higher dividend yield at 13.46% vs PINE's 0.18%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $17.00 | $44.00 | $14.00 | $10.00 | $20.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 15 | 11 | 17 | 11 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +11.7% | +13.5% | +4.6% | +6.7% | +0.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 9 | 4 | 6 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.24 | $7.62 | $0.71 | $0.66 | $0.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +8.3% | +1.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.1% |
IIPR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). PINE leads in 2 (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility).
FPI vs IIPR vs SAFE vs LAND vs PINE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc.
(PINE) is the stronger pick with 15. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 8% for Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR). Safehold Inc. (SAFE) offers the better valuation at 9. 7x trailing P/E (9. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Safehold Inc. (SAFE) a "Buy" — based on 17 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 — FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE?
On trailing P/E, Safehold Inc.
(SAFE) is the cheapest at 9. 7x versus Farmland Partners Inc. at 17. 1x. On forward P/E, Safehold Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Safehold Inc. wins at 1. 44x versus Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. 's 3. 52x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE?
Over the past 5 years, Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc.
(PINE) delivered a total return of +41. 2%, compared to -71. 0% for Safehold Inc. (SAFE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IIPR returned +436. 4% versus SAFE's -50. 3%. 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 — FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc.
(PINE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 33β versus Safehold Inc. 's 0. 96β — meaning SAFE is approximately 190% more volatile than PINE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 21% versus 184% for Safehold Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc.
(PINE) is pulling ahead at 15. 9% versus -13. 8% for Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Safehold Inc. grew EPS 7. 4% year-over-year, compared to -257. 1% for Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SAFE leads at 12. 6% 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 — FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE?
Farmland Partners Inc.
(FPI) is the more profitable company, earning 60. 5% net margin versus -13. 8% for Gladstone Land Corporation — meaning it keeps 60. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SAFE leads at 79. 8% versus 30. 5% for PINE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SAFE leads at 94. 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 FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE 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, Safehold Inc. (SAFE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 44x versus Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. 's 3. 52x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Safehold Inc. (SAFE) trades at 9. 1x forward P/E versus 59. 3x for Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc. — 50. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FPI: 60. 6% to $17. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. (IIPR) offers the highest yield at 13. 5%, versus 0. 2% for Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc. (PINE).
09Is FPI or IIPR or SAFE or LAND or PINE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Farmland Partners Inc.
(FPI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 56), 11. 7% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FPI: +29. 7%, SAFE: -50. 3%), 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 FPI and IIPR and SAFE and LAND and PINE?
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: FPI is a small-cap deep-value stock; IIPR is a small-cap deep-value stock; SAFE is a small-cap deep-value stock; LAND is a small-cap income-oriented stock; PINE is a small-cap high-growth stock. FPI, IIPR, SAFE, LAND pay a dividend while PINE does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.