REIT - Diversified
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
SAFE vs LAND vs PINE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
REIT - Industrial
REIT - Retail
SAFE vs LAND vs PINE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | REIT - Diversified | REIT - Industrial | REIT - Retail |
| Market Cap | $1.08B | $355M | $279M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $386M | $76M | $65M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $114M | $-10M | $-415K |
| Gross Margin | 97.7% | 87.4% | -4.1% |
| Operating Margin | 39.8% | 78.6% | 28.0% |
| Forward P/E | 8.9x | — | 58.8x |
| Total Debt | $4.49B | $0.00 | $394M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $22M | $27M | $5M |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Safehold Inc. (SAFE) | 100 | 27.5 | -72.5% |
| Gladstone Land Corp… (LAND) | 100 | 67.5 | -32.5% |
| Alpine Income Prope… (PINE) | 100 | 157.5 | +57.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SAFE vs LAND vs PINE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SAFE has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and defensive.
- Rev growth 5.4%, EPS growth 7.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 12.6%
- Beta 0.96, yield 4.7%, current ratio 17.86x
- Lower P/E (8.9x vs 58.8x)
LAND is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 6 yrs, beta 0.68, yield 6.7%
- 43.2% 10Y total return vs PINE's 37.4%
- 6.7% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs SAFE's 4.7%
PINE is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, current ratio 0.33x
- 15.9% FFO/revenue growth vs LAND's -10.7%
- Beta 0.33 vs SAFE's 0.96, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 15.9% FFO/revenue growth vs LAND's -10.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.9x vs 58.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.7% margin vs LAND's -13.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs SAFE's 0.96, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.7% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs SAFE's 4.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +35.5% vs SAFE's +2.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.6% ROA vs LAND's -0.8%, ROIC 3.4% vs 4.9% |
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.
SAFE vs LAND vs PINE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SAFE leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SAFE is the larger business by revenue, generating $386M annually — 6.0x PINE's $65M. SAFE is the more profitable business, keeping 29.7% 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 | $386M | $76M | $65M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $163M | $94M | $45M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $114M | -$10M | -$415,000 |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $48M | $5M | -$46M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +97.7% | +87.4% | -4.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +39.8% | +78.6% | +28.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +29.7% | -13.8% | -0.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.4% | +6.2% | -71.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.5% | +38.6% | +29.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.3% | +66.7% | +185.7% |
Valuation Metrics
SAFE leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, LAND's 3.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SAFE's 17.6x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.1B | $355M | $279M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.6B | $328M | $669M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 9.49x | -33.76x | -88.55x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 8.89x | — | 58.83x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.50x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 17.57x | 3.48x | 14.58x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.81x | 4.67x | 4.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.44x | 0.53x | 1.01x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.67x | 50.83x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
LAND leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SAFE delivers a 4.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $5 in annual profit, vs $-2 for LAND. PINE carries lower financial leverage with a 1.31x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SAFE's 1.84x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SAFE scores 4/9 vs PINE's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +4.7% | -1.6% | -0.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.6% | -0.8% | -0.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.4% | +4.9% | +2.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.4% | +4.7% | +2.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.84x | — | 1.31x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4.5B | -$27M | $390M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $22M | $27M | $5M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.5B | $0 | $394M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 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 $14,113 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,852 for SAFE. Over the past 12 months, PINE leads with a +35.5% total return vs SAFE's +2.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PINE at 13.3% vs SAFE's -14.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.0% | +9.3% | +17.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +2.9% | +10.3% | +35.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -38.5% | -27.3% | +45.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -71.5% | -41.5% | +41.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -48.2% | +43.2% | +37.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -14.9% | -10.1% | +13.3% |
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 93.7% from its 52-week high vs LAND's 75.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.96x | 0.68x | 0.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $17.16 | $13.00 | $20.80 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.76 | $8.47 | $13.10 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.9% | +75.3% | +93.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.5 | 35.8 | 53.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 338K | 570K | 175K |
Analyst Outlook
LAND leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SAFE as "Buy", LAND as "Buy", PINE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 6.5% upside for PINE (target: $21) vs -7.2% for SAFE (target: $14). For income investors, LAND offers the higher dividend yield at 6.72% vs PINE's 0.18%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.00 | $10.00 | $20.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 11 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.7% | +6.7% | +0.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 6 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.71 | $0.66 | $0.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.2% |
SAFE leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). LAND leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook).
SAFE vs LAND vs PINE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is 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 -10. 7% for Gladstone Land Corporation (LAND). Safehold Inc. (SAFE) offers the better valuation at 9. 5x trailing P/E (8. 9x 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 — SAFE or LAND or PINE?
On forward P/E, Safehold Inc.
is actually cheaper at 8. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SAFE or LAND or PINE?
Over the past 5 years, Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc.
(PINE) delivered a total return of +41. 1%, compared to -71. 5% for Safehold Inc. (SAFE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LAND returned +43. 2% versus SAFE's -48. 2%. 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 — 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, Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc. (PINE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 131% versus 184% for Safehold Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SAFE or LAND or PINE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc.
(PINE) is pulling ahead at 15. 9% versus -10. 7% for Gladstone Land Corporation (LAND). 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 — SAFE or LAND or PINE?
Safehold Inc.
(SAFE) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 7% net margin versus -13. 8% for Gladstone Land Corporation — meaning it keeps 29. 7% 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 SAFE or LAND or PINE more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Safehold Inc.
(SAFE) trades at 8. 9x forward P/E versus 58. 8x for Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc. — 49. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PINE: 6. 5% to $20. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — SAFE or LAND or PINE?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Gladstone Land Corporation (LAND) offers the highest yield at 6. 7%, versus 0. 2% for Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc. (PINE).
09Is SAFE or LAND or PINE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Gladstone Land Corporation (LAND) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
68), 6. 7% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LAND: +43. 2%, SAFE: -48. 2%), 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 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: SAFE is a small-cap deep-value stock; LAND is a small-cap income-oriented stock; PINE is a small-cap high-growth stock. 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.