UE vs KIM vs RPT vs REG vs FRT

For growth investors, Rithm Property Trust Inc.

(RPT) is the stronger pick with 11. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 4% for Regency Centers Corporation (REG). Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT) offers the better valuation at 24. 1x trailing P/E (40. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Regency Centers Corporation (REG) a "Buy" — based on 32 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, Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT) is the cheapest at 24.

1x versus Urban Edge Properties at 29. 8x. On forward P/E, Kimco Realty Corporation is actually cheaper at 30. 5x — 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: Regency Centers Corporation wins at 0. 52x versus Federal Realty Investment Trust's 1. 65x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Rithm Property Trust Inc.

(RPT) delivered a total return of +181. 8%, compared to +18. 1% for Federal Realty Investment Trust (FRT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RPT returned +425. 3% versus FRT's -1. 0%. 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), Regency Centers Corporation (REG) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

36β versus Rithm Property Trust Inc. 's 0. 66β — meaning RPT is approximately 82% more volatile than REG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Kimco Realty Corporation (KIM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 82% versus 3% for Rithm Property Trust Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Rithm Property Trust Inc.

(RPT) is pulling ahead at 11. 8% versus 3. 4% for Regency Centers Corporation (REG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Rithm Property Trust Inc. grew EPS 97. 4% year-over-year, compared to 23. 3% for Urban Edge Properties. Over a 3-year CAGR, KIM leads at 7. 4% 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.

Regency Centers Corporation (REG) is the more profitable company, earning 33.

9% net margin versus 2. 8% for Rithm Property Trust Inc. — meaning it keeps 33. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RPT leads at 73. 7% versus 26. 8% for UE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RPT leads at 84. 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.

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, Regency Centers Corporation (REG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 52x versus Federal Realty Investment Trust's 1. 65x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Kimco Realty Corporation (KIM) trades at 30. 5x forward P/E versus 98. 7x for Rithm Property Trust Inc. — 68. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RPT: 58. 6% to $24. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Rithm Property Trust Inc. (RPT) offers the highest yield at 9. 6%, versus 3. 4% for Urban Edge Properties (UE).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Regency Centers Corporation (REG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

36), 3. 6% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (REG: +28. 9%, FRT: -1. 0%), 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.