Real Estate - Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
KW vs FPH vs LEN vs CWK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Real Estate - Development
Residential Construction
Real Estate - Services
KW vs FPH vs LEN vs CWK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Real Estate - Services | Real Estate - Development | Residential Construction | Real Estate - Services |
| Market Cap | $1.53B | $3.50B | $18.93B | $3.24B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $501M | $110M | $34.13B | $10.54B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $5M | $41M | $2.08B | $74M |
| Gross Margin | 18.8% | 40.4% | 17.6% | 13.2% |
| Operating Margin | 10.4% | -1.1% | 7.7% | 4.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 16.3x | 14.2x | 9.6x |
| Total Debt | $4.51B | $514M | $6.32B | $3.24B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $-3M | $427M | $3.80B | $784M |
KW vs FPH vs LEN vs CWK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kennedy-Wilson Hold… (KW) | 100 | 78.5 | -21.5% |
| Five Point Holdings… (FPH) | 100 | 97.6 | -2.4% |
| Lennar Corporation (LEN) | 100 | 145.1 | +45.1% |
| Cushman & Wakefield… (CWK) | 100 | 135.0 | +35.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: KW vs FPH vs LEN vs CWK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
KW carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.73, yield 4.5%
- Beta 0.73, yield 4.5%
- Beta 0.73 vs CWK's 1.90
- 4.5% yield, vs LEN's 2.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
FPH is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.87, Low D/E 21.5%, current ratio 4.02x
- 37.0% margin vs CWK's 0.7%
LEN is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 122.6% 10Y total return vs KW's -8.3%
- 6.0% ROA vs KW's 0.1%, ROIC 7.9% vs 0.6%
CWK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 8.9%, EPS growth -32.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.6%
- 8.9% FFO/revenue growth vs FPH's -53.8%
- Lower P/E (9.6x vs 14.2x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.9% FFO/revenue growth vs FPH's -53.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.6x vs 14.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 37.0% margin vs CWK's 0.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.73 vs CWK's 1.90 | |
| Dividends | 4.5% yield, vs LEN's 2.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +73.8% vs LEN's -16.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.0% ROA vs KW's 0.1%, ROIC 7.9% vs 0.6% |
KW vs FPH vs LEN vs CWK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
KW vs FPH vs LEN vs CWK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FPH leads in 1 of 6 categories
LEN leads 1 • KW leads 1 • CWK leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FPH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LEN is the larger business by revenue, generating $34.1B annually — 309.1x FPH's $110M. FPH is the more profitable business, keeping 37.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CWK's 0.7%. On growth, CWK holds the edge at +11.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $501M | $110M | $34.1B | $10.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $185M | $2M | $2.8B | $568M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $5M | $41M | $2.1B | $74M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $4M | $4M | $28M | $230M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +18.8% | +40.4% | +17.6% | +13.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.4% | -1.1% | +7.7% | +4.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.9% | +37.0% | +6.1% | +0.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +0.8% | +3.5% | +0.1% | +2.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -11.0% | +3.2% | -6.5% | +11.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.3% | -118.8% | -52.5% | — |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — KW and CWK each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.2x trailing earnings, FPH trades at a 72% valuation discount to CWK's 36.4x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LEN's 7.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KW's 32.6x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.5B | $3.5B | $18.9B | $3.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.0B | $3.6B | $21.4B | $5.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -39.32x | 10.19x | 10.99x | 36.42x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.30x | 14.24x | 9.58x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 43.27x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 32.63x | — | 7.43x | 10.13x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.06x | 31.79x | 0.55x | 0.32x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.97x | 0.31x | 1.02x | 1.66x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 4.91x | 33.30x | 671.74x | 11.07x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LEN leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LEN delivers a 9.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $0 for KW. FPH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.22x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KW's 2.86x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KW scores 6/9 vs LEN's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.3% | +1.8% | +9.2% | +3.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.1% | +1.3% | +6.0% | +1.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +0.6% | -0.2% | +7.9% | +7.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.8% | -0.2% | +8.8% | +7.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.86x | 0.22x | 0.29x | 1.66x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.5B | $88M | $2.5B | $2.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | -$3M | $427M | $3.8B | $784M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.5B | $514M | $6.3B | $3.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.16x | — | 198.24x | 1.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — KW and FPH and LEN each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LEN five years ago would be worth $8,891 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,537 for FPH. Over the past 12 months, KW leads with a +73.8% total return vs LEN's -16.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FPH at 27.3% vs LEN's -6.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +15.5% | -10.1% | -14.9% | -12.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +73.8% | -10.3% | -16.8% | +38.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -11.6% | +106.3% | -18.6% | +83.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -27.2% | -34.6% | -11.1% | -26.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -8.3% | -67.5% | +122.6% | -22.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -4.0% | +27.3% | -6.6% | +22.4% |
Risk & Volatility
KW leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KW is the less volatile stock with a 0.73 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CWK's 1.90 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KW currently trades 99.3% from its 52-week high vs LEN's 60.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.73x | 0.87x | 0.92x | 1.90x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.09 | $6.64 | $144.24 | $17.40 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.98 | $4.72 | $83.03 | $9.43 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.3% | +73.6% | +60.8% | +79.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.6 | 47.1 | 48.5 | 58.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 188K | 2.9M | 1.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KW and LEN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: KW as "Buy", FPH as "Hold", LEN as "Buy", CWK as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 35.8% upside for CWK (target: $19) vs 16.4% for LEN (target: $102). For income investors, KW offers the higher dividend yield at 4.48% vs LEN's 2.30%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $102.14 | $18.80 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 5 | 50 | 16 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.5% | — | +2.3% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | 12 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.49 | — | $2.02 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.6% | 0.0% | +9.6% | +0.3% |
FPH leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). LEN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
KW vs FPH vs LEN vs CWK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is KW or FPH or LEN or CWK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Cushman & Wakefield plc (CWK) is the stronger pick with 8.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -53. 8% for Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH). Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH) offers the better valuation at 10. 2x trailing P/E (16. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc. (KW) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — KW or FPH or LEN or CWK?
On trailing P/E, Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH) is the cheapest at 10.
2x versus Cushman & Wakefield plc at 36. 4x. On forward P/E, Cushman & Wakefield plc is actually cheaper at 9. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — KW or FPH or LEN or CWK?
Over the past 5 years, Lennar Corporation (LEN) delivered a total return of -11.
1%, compared to -34. 6% for Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LEN returned +122. 6% versus FPH's -67. 5%. 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 — KW or FPH or LEN or CWK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc.
(KW) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 73β versus Cushman & Wakefield plc's 1. 90β — meaning CWK is approximately 162% more volatile than KW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 22% versus 3% for Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — KW or FPH or LEN or CWK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cushman & Wakefield plc (CWK) is pulling ahead at 8.
9% versus -53. 8% for Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 50. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — KW or FPH or LEN or CWK?
Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH) is the more profitable company, earning 64.
5% net margin versus 0. 9% for Cushman & Wakefield plc — meaning it keeps 64. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KW leads at 10. 4% 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.
07Is KW or FPH or LEN or CWK more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Cushman & Wakefield plc (CWK) trades at 9.
6x forward P/E versus 16. 3x for Five Point Holdings, LLC — 6. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CWK: 35. 8% to $18. 80.
08Which pays a better dividend — KW or FPH or LEN or CWK?
In this comparison, KW (4.
5% yield), LEN (2. 3% yield) pay a dividend. FPH, CWK do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is KW or FPH or LEN or CWK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc.
(KW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 73), 4. 5% yield). Cushman & Wakefield plc (CWK) carries a higher beta of 1. 90 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KW: -8. 3%, CWK: -22. 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 KW and FPH and LEN and CWK?
These companies operate in different sectors (KW (Real Estate) and FPH (Real Estate) and LEN (Consumer Cyclical) and CWK (Real Estate)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: KW is a small-cap income-oriented stock; FPH is a small-cap deep-value stock; LEN is a mid-cap deep-value stock; CWK is a small-cap quality compounder stock. KW, LEN pay a dividend while FPH, CWK do 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.