NYC vs CBRE vs JLL vs CWK

For growth investors, CBRE Group, Inc.

(CBRE) is the stronger pick with 13. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 8% for American Strategic Investment Co. (NYC). Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) offers the better valuation at 20. 0x trailing P/E (14. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CBRE Group, Inc. (CBRE) a "Buy" — based on 20 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, Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) is the cheapest at 20.

0x versus CBRE Group, Inc. at 38. 1x. On forward P/E, Cushman & Wakefield plc is actually cheaper at 9. 6x — 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: Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated wins at 0. 89x versus CBRE Group, Inc. 's 1. 65x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, CBRE Group, Inc.

(CBRE) delivered a total return of +68. 8%, compared to -88. 1% for American Strategic Investment Co. (NYC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CBRE returned +405. 3% versus NYC's -93. 8%. 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), American Strategic Investment Co.

(NYC) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 26β versus Cushman & Wakefield plc's 1. 90β — meaning CWK is approximately -821% more volatile than NYC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 44% versus 5% for American Strategic Investment Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), CBRE Group, Inc.

(CBRE) is pulling ahead at 13. 4% versus -1. 8% for American Strategic Investment Co. (NYC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated grew EPS 45. 1% year-over-year, compared to -32. 1% for Cushman & Wakefield plc. Over a 3-year CAGR, CBRE leads at 9. 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.

Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) is the more profitable company, earning 3.

0% net margin versus -228. 3% for American Strategic Investment Co. — meaning it keeps 3. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JLL leads at 4. 5% versus -196. 9% for NYC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JLL leads at 99. 0%, 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.

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, Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 89x versus CBRE Group, Inc. 's 1. 65x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Cushman & Wakefield plc (CWK) trades at 9. 6x forward P/E versus 19. 2x for CBRE Group, Inc. — 9. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CWK: 35. 8% to $18. 80.

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, American Strategic Investment Co.

(NYC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 26)). 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 (NYC: -93. 8%, 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.

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.

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.