SILA vs HR vs DOC vs CHCT

For growth investors, Sila Realty Trust, Inc.

(SILA) is the stronger pick with 5. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 9% for Healthcare Realty Trust Incorporated (HR). Sila Realty Trust, Inc. (SILA) offers the better valuation at 51. 0x trailing P/E (47. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Sila Realty Trust, Inc. (SILA) a "Buy" — based on 4 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, Sila Realty Trust, Inc.

(SILA) is the cheapest at 51. 0x versus Community Healthcare Trust Incorporated at 227. 1x. On forward P/E, Community Healthcare Trust Incorporated is actually cheaper at 37. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Sila Realty Trust, Inc.

(SILA) delivered a total return of +52. 2%, compared to -45. 5% for Community Healthcare Trust Incorporated (CHCT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CHCT returned +83. 4% versus DOC's +11. 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), Healthcare Realty Trust Incorporated (HR) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

19β versus Healthpeak Properties, Inc. 's 0. 66β — meaning DOC is approximately 246% more volatile than HR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Sila Realty Trust, Inc. (SILA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 54% versus 126% for Healthpeak Properties, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Sila Realty Trust, Inc.

(SILA) is pulling ahead at 5. 7% versus -6. 9% for Healthcare Realty Trust Incorporated (HR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Community Healthcare Trust Incorporated grew EPS 133. 7% year-over-year, compared to -72. 2% for Healthpeak Properties, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, DOC leads at 11. 0% 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.

Sila Realty Trust, Inc.

(SILA) is the more profitable company, earning 16. 8% net margin versus -20. 8% for Healthcare Realty Trust Incorporated — meaning it keeps 16. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SILA leads at 32. 9% versus 8. 0% for HR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SILA leads at 87. 9%, 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, Community Healthcare Trust Incorporated (CHCT) trades at 37.

4x forward P/E versus 90. 4x for Healthpeak Properties, Inc. — 53. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CHCT: 5. 2% to $18. 50.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Community Healthcare Trust Incorporated (CHCT) offers the highest yield at 11. 4%, versus 5. 2% for Sila Realty Trust, Inc. (SILA).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Healthcare Realty Trust Incorporated (HR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

19), 5. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (HR: +40. 1%, DOC: +11. 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.

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.