Real Estate - Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
STHO vs PINE vs EPRT vs FCPT vs NNN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
REIT - Retail
REIT - Diversified
REIT - Retail
REIT - Retail
STHO vs PINE vs EPRT vs FCPT vs NNN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Real Estate - Services | REIT - Retail | REIT - Diversified | REIT - Retail | REIT - Retail |
| Market Cap | $114M | $281M | $6.81B | $2.80B | $8.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $84M | $65M | $593M | $301M | $936M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-148M | $-415K | $257M | $117M | $387M |
| Gross Margin | -22.9% | -4.1% | 84.7% | 98.0% | 81.4% |
| Operating Margin | -7.6% | 28.0% | 65.0% | 56.0% | 63.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 59.3x | 24.1x | 21.8x | 21.7x |
| Total Debt | $270M | $394M | $2.52B | $1.21B | $4.82B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $50M | $5M | $60M | $12M | $5M |
STHO vs PINE vs EPRT vs FCPT vs NNN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Star Holdings (STHO) | 100 | 50.8 | -49.2% |
| Alpine Income Prope… (PINE) | 100 | 116.7 | +16.7% |
| Essential Propertie… (EPRT) | 100 | 126.6 | +26.6% |
| Four Corners Proper… (FCPT) | 100 | 94.8 | -5.2% |
| NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN) | 100 | 100.8 | +0.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: STHO vs PINE vs EPRT vs FCPT vs NNN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, STHO doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PINE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +37.3% vs FCPT's -3.0%
EPRT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 25.0%, EPS growth 11.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 25.2%
- 190.2% 10Y total return vs FCPT's 99.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.01, Low D/E 59.9%, current ratio 6.13x
- PEG 1.01 vs NNN's 1.94
FCPT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 8 yrs, beta 0.14, yield 5.5%
- 5.5% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs NNN's 5.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
NNN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and efficiency is your priority.
- Lower P/E (21.7x vs 21.8x), PEG 1.94 vs 118.24
- 4.1% ROA vs STHO's -24.8%, ROIC 4.8% vs 1.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 25.0% FFO/revenue growth vs NNN's 6.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (21.7x vs 21.8x), PEG 1.94 vs 118.24 | |
| Quality / Margins | 43.3% margin vs STHO's -175.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs STHO's 1.06, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 5.5% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs NNN's 5.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +37.3% vs FCPT's -3.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.1% ROA vs STHO's -24.8%, ROIC 4.8% vs 1.8% |
STHO vs PINE vs EPRT vs FCPT vs NNN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
STHO vs PINE vs EPRT vs FCPT vs NNN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NNN leads in 1 of 6 categories
PINE leads 1 • STHO leads 0 • EPRT leads 0 • FCPT leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — PINE and EPRT and FCPT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NNN is the larger business by revenue, generating $936M annually — 14.5x PINE's $65M. EPRT is the more profitable business, keeping 43.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to STHO's -175.8%. On growth, PINE holds the edge at +29.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $84M | $65M | $593M | $301M | $936M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | $45M | $548M | $231M | $867M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$148M | -$415,000 | $257M | $117M | $387M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$77M | -$46M | -$151M | $188M | $464M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -22.9% | -4.1% | +84.7% | +98.0% | +81.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -7.6% | +28.0% | +65.0% | +56.0% | +63.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -175.8% | -0.6% | +43.3% | +38.7% | +41.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -91.3% | -71.7% | -25.5% | +62.5% | +49.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -23.6% | +29.6% | +24.1% | +9.4% | +4.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -98.0% | +185.7% | -3.4% | +7.7% | -2.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — STHO and PINE and NNN each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.5x trailing earnings, NNN trades at a 13% valuation discount to EPRT's 24.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), EPRT offers better value at 1.03x vs FCPT's 118.24x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $114M | $281M | $6.8B | $2.8B | $8.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $334M | $671M | $9.3B | $4.0B | $13.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.80x | -89.27x | 24.59x | 23.37x | 21.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 59.32x | 24.13x | 21.81x | 21.69x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.03x | 118.24x | 1.93x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 18.88x | 14.63x | 17.96x | 17.81x | 15.85x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.03x | 4.65x | 12.11x | 9.51x | 9.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.44x | 1.01x | 1.51x | 1.61x | 1.90x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 17.86x | 14.54x | 12.69x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NNN leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NNN delivers a 8.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $-50 for STHO. EPRT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.60x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PINE's 1.31x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FCPT scores 7/9 vs PINE's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -50.3% | -0.1% | +6.3% | +7.4% | +8.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -24.8% | -0.1% | +3.8% | +4.1% | +4.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.8% | +2.2% | +4.4% | +4.5% | +4.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.1% | +2.8% | +5.8% | +6.0% | +6.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.02x | 1.31x | 0.60x | 0.74x | 1.09x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $220M | $390M | $2.5B | $1.2B | $4.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $50M | $5M | $60M | $12M | $5M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $270M | $394M | $2.5B | $1.2B | $4.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.68x | 0.82x | 3.17x | 3.17x | 2.93x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PINE leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EPRT five years ago would be worth $14,313 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,418 for STHO. Over the past 12 months, PINE leads with a +37.3% total return vs FCPT's -3.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PINE at 13.6% vs STHO's -19.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +8.8% | +18.8% | +5.7% | +11.2% | +15.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +37.0% | +37.3% | +2.8% | -3.0% | +12.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -46.8% | +46.6% | +38.2% | +14.0% | +15.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -55.8% | +41.2% | +43.1% | +17.2% | +15.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -55.8% | +38.3% | +190.2% | +99.1% | +37.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -19.0% | +13.6% | +11.4% | +4.5% | +4.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EPRT and NNN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EPRT is the less volatile stock with a 0.01 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than STHO's 1.06 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NNN currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs FCPT's 90.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.06x | 0.33x | 0.01x | 0.14x | 0.15x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.25 | $20.80 | $34.73 | $28.14 | $46.03 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $6.06 | $13.10 | $28.95 | $22.78 | $38.90 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +95.5% | +94.4% | +90.6% | +90.5% | +96.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.0 | 54.0 | 45.6 | 55.6 | 58.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 25K | 176K | 2.0M | 658K | 1.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FCPT and NNN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PINE as "Buy", EPRT as "Buy", FCPT as "Hold", NNN as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 16.0% upside for EPRT (target: $37) vs 3.5% for NNN (target: $46). For income investors, FCPT offers the higher dividend yield at 5.49% vs PINE's 0.18%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $20.75 | $36.50 | $27.00 | $46.06 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 12 | 22 | 15 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.2% | +3.7% | +5.5% | +5.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.04 | $1.16 | $1.40 | $2.36 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +7.0% | +3.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
NNN leads in 1 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency). PINE leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
STHO vs PINE vs EPRT vs FCPT vs NNN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.
(EPRT) is the stronger pick with 25. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 6% for NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN). NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN) offers the better valuation at 21. 5x trailing P/E (21. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc. (PINE) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN?
On trailing P/E, NNN REIT, Inc.
(NNN) is the cheapest at 21. 5x versus Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc. at 24. 6x. On forward P/E, NNN REIT, Inc. is actually cheaper at 21. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc. wins at 1. 01x versus Four Corners Property Trust, Inc. 's 118. 24x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN?
Over the past 5 years, Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.
(EPRT) delivered a total return of +43. 1%, compared to -55. 8% for Star Holdings (STHO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EPRT returned +190. 2% versus STHO's -55. 8%. 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 — STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.
(EPRT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 01β versus Star Holdings's 1. 06β — meaning STHO is approximately 11944% more volatile than EPRT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc. (EPRT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 60% versus 131% for Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.
(EPRT) is pulling ahead at 25. 0% versus 6. 6% for NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Star Holdings grew EPS 24. 7% year-over-year, compared to -257. 1% for Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, EPRT leads at 25. 2% 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 — STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN?
Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.
(EPRT) is the more profitable company, earning 45. 0% net margin versus -58. 3% for Star Holdings — meaning it keeps 45. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EPRT leads at 64. 5% versus 11. 3% for STHO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FCPT leads at 95. 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 STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN 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, Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc. (EPRT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 01x versus Four Corners Property Trust, Inc. 's 118. 24x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, NNN REIT, Inc. (NNN) trades at 21. 7x forward P/E versus 59. 3x for Alpine Income Property Trust, Inc. — 37. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EPRT: 16. 0% to $36. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN?
In this comparison, FCPT (5.
5% yield), NNN (5. 3% yield), EPRT (3. 7% yield), PINE (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. STHO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is STHO or PINE or EPRT or FCPT or NNN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.
(EPRT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 01), 3. 7% yield, +190. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (EPRT: +190. 2%, STHO: -55. 8%), 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 STHO and PINE and EPRT and FCPT and NNN?
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: STHO is a small-cap high-growth stock; PINE is a small-cap high-growth stock; EPRT is a small-cap high-growth stock; FCPT is a small-cap income-oriented stock; NNN is a small-cap income-oriented stock. EPRT, FCPT, NNN pay a dividend while STHO, PINE 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.