Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 23.3x · EV/EBITDA 14.7x · ROE 6.5%. (2016–2025 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $6.0B | $6.0B | $5.5B | $3.9B | $3.2B | $3.4B | $2.0B | $1.9B | $605M | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $8.5B | $8.4B | $7.6B | $5.6B | $4.6B | $4.5B | $2.9B | $2.6B | $1.1B | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 23.35 | 23.17 | 27.20 | 20.61 | 23.71 | 35.16 | 48.18 | 39.38 | 38.44 | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 8.79 | 10.64 | 12.32 | 10.91 | 11.13 | 14.71 | 12.43 | 13.41 | 6.29 | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 1.34 | 1.42 | 1.55 | 1.31 | 1.28 | 1.66 | 1.29 | 1.55 | 0.75 | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | 15.69 | 17.96 | 15.41 | 15.11 | 20.23 | 20.52 | 21.10 | 13.69 | — | — |
| P/OCF | 15.87 | 15.69 | 17.96 | 15.41 | 15.11 | 20.23 | 20.52 | 21.10 | 13.19 | — | — |
P/E links to full P/E history page with 30-year chart
Enterprise-value multiples — capital-structure-neutral measures of total business value
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 15.02 | 16.97 | 15.50 | 15.95 | 19.62 | 17.53 | 18.56 | 11.86 | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 14.67 | 16.36 | 19.05 | 16.17 | 17.33 | 22.19 | 21.75 | 21.02 | 22.14 | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 23.48 | 23.11 | 26.97 | 22.32 | 27.71 | 34.43 | 39.73 | 34.33 | 22.38 | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 22.15 | 24.73 | 21.90 | 21.66 | 26.99 | 28.93 | 29.21 | 25.81 | — | — |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 84.0% | 84.0% | 98.9% | 98.7% | 98.8% | 97.5% | 97.6% | 97.8% | 97.9% | 97.2% | 61.6% |
| Operating Margin | 64.5% | 64.5% | 61.9% | 67.5% | 61.2% | 58.4% | 44.4% | 57.3% | 20.6% | 45.0% | 33.2% |
| Net Profit Margin | 45.0% | 45.0% | 45.2% | 53.0% | 46.8% | 41.6% | 25.8% | 30.0% | 16.2% | 11.6% | 24.1% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 6.5% | 6.5% | 6.2% | 7.0% | 5.9% | 5.3% | 3.0% | 4.2% | 1.8% | 0.9% | 0.8% |
| ROA | 4.0% | 4.0% | 3.8% | 4.3% | 3.7% | 3.3% | 1.9% | 2.5% | 1.3% | 0.9% | 0.8% |
| ROIC | 4.4% | 4.4% | 4.1% | 4.3% | 3.7% | 3.6% | 2.5% | 3.7% | 1.0% | 1.5% | — |
| ROCE | 5.8% | 5.8% | 5.3% | 5.6% | 4.9% | 4.7% | 3.3% | 4.8% | 1.7% | 3.5% | 1.1% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.57 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.55 | 0.60 | 0.67 | 0.81 | 0.60 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 4.89 | 4.89 | 5.32 | 4.91 | 5.47 | 5.85 | 6.53 | 5.91 | 10.48 | 16.65 | 25.76 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.59 | 0.58 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.53 | 0.60 | 0.66 | 0.80 | 0.60 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 4.77 | 4.77 | 5.21 | 4.79 | 5.24 | 5.56 | 6.32 | 5.84 | 10.39 | 16.49 | 25.59 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 6.46 | 6.77 | 6.49 | 6.55 | 6.76 | 8.42 | 8.11 | 12.12 | 32.75 | 25.77 |
| Interest Coverage | 3.17 | 3.17 | 3.60 | 4.75 | 4.09 | 3.90 | 2.44 | 2.79 | 1.69 | 1.29 | — |
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 6.13 | 6.13 | 6.40 | 2.31 | 6.09 | 5.38 | 3.10 | 4.25 | 3.07 | 4.69 | 5.66 |
| Quick Ratio | 6.13 | 6.13 | 6.29 | 2.20 | 6.02 | 5.14 | 3.10 | 4.22 | 2.11 | 4.08 | 5.66 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.45 | 0.56 | 0.91 | 0.92 | 0.79 | 0.23 | 0.23 | 1.06 | 0.75 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.03 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | 0.50 | 0.63 | 0.72 | 0.37 | — | 2.54 | 0.11 | 0.37 | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Earnings, FCF, buyback, and dividend yields — total returns to shareholders
Full dividend history and growth charts are on the Dividend History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | 4.1% | 3.9% | 3.6% | 4.3% | 4.4% | 3.3% | 4.2% | 3.4% | 2.3% | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | 92.5% | 92.5% | 98.4% | 88.2% | 105.6% | 117.4% | 204.6% | 152.7% | 90.1% | 1607.7% | 268.0% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 4.3% | 4.3% | 3.7% | 4.9% | 4.2% | 2.8% | 2.1% | 2.5% | 2.6% | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | 6.4% | 5.6% | 6.5% | 6.6% | 4.9% | 4.9% | 4.7% | 7.3% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 4.1% | 3.9% | 3.6% | 4.3% | 4.4% | 3.3% | 4.2% | 3.4% | 2.3% | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $202M | $177M | $154M | $136M | $117M | $96M | $75M | $44M | $41M | $41M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 10 years · Updated daily
Live VCP patterns, Cup & Handle overlays, support/resistance, and AI trade plans.
High-probability breakout stocks crossing their pivot across 5 pattern engines.
DCF models, multiple analysis, and analyst estimates.
10-year return with dividends reinvested.
Compare growth, multiples, and margins vs sector.
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying EPRT stock.
Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 23.3x. The historical average is 32.0x. This places it at the 25th percentile of its historical range.
Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 14.7x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 19.5x.
Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 6.5%. The historical average is 4.2%.
Based on historical data, Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc. is trading at a P/E of 23.3x. This is at the 25th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.'s current dividend yield is 4.15% with a payout ratio of 92.5%.
Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc. has 84.0% gross margin and 64.5% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Essential Properties Realty Trust, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 4.9x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Negative AFFO versus dividend obligations
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Premium Multiple Relies on Growth Story
At 20.92x P/FFO in 2026Q3, EPRT sits well above its own 17.83x reading in 2024Q3, while its 4.4% dividend yield trails NNN at 5.7% and PINE at 7.1%, according to EPRT's reported valuation metrics, implying pricing depends on continued growth.
The multiple has drifted upward even as FFO per share growth decelerated to 2.4% in 2026Q3 from 30.7% a year earlier, which suggests the premium is increasingly resting on acquisition momentum rather than per-share earnings acceleration. Relative to Agree Realty's much richer 37.68x P/E and NNN's 20.15x, EPRT's 20.84x P/E and 12.6% EV/EBITDA-versus-20.9x P/FFO spread look unremarkable, but the low yield indicates investors are not being compensated for the middle-market tenant risk they underwrite. Investors should monitor whether the P/FFO holds if acquisition volumes slow, since private-market cap rate support has not been quantified in the supplied data.
NOI Margin Volatility Obscures Real Trend
EPRT's NOI margin read 98.9% through 2025Q2, fell to 44.2% in 2025Q4 and 44.8% in 2026Q1, then recovered to 98.7% by 2026Q3, a discontinuity that, per SEC filings, points to expense classification shifts rather than a true deterioration in property economics.
Because the triple-net structure transfers taxes, insurance and maintenance to tenants, a structurally near-100% NOI margin is expected, so the two quarters near 44% appear more consistent with a gross-up or reimbursement presentation change than with actual property-level cost absorption, though this warrants verification. The more telling signal is that FFO per share advanced only 6.5% from $0.46 in 2024Q2 to $0.49 in 2026Q3 while total FFO grew roughly 33% year over year, implying profitability growth is being sourced externally rather than organically per tenant rent escalation. With contractual escalators typically in the 1-2% range, the durability of same-store NOI growth will likely be the constraint on margin expansion as the asset base scales.
Payout Ratio Masks AFFO Shortfall
The FFO payout ratio of 65.5% in 2026Q3 appears comfortable against its 54.8%-63.9% historical range, yet AFFO per share was negative $0.90 against an implied quarterly dividend near $0.29, a divergence that, as reported in EPRT's quarterly disclosures, raises questions about true distribution coverage.
On an FFO basis, EPRT retains roughly 34% of earnings after distributions, which would ordinarily signal ample safety, but that retention is meaningless if recurring leasing commissions, tenant improvements and straight-line rent adjustments push AFFO below zero in multiple quarters of the trailing year. The data itself is internally inconsistent: a payout ratio of 0.66 exactly matches dividends paid over FFO rather than AFFO, suggesting a classification issue that, if AFFO figures are accurate, would mean distributions are being funded by external capital rather than recurring cash earnings. Until the AFFO reconciliation is clarified, investors should treat the headline payout ratio as an upper bound on safety and monitor dividend coverage against AFFO directly.
Rising Leverage Meets Thinning Coverage
Debt-to-equity climbed to 0.65 in 2026Q3 from 0.56 in 2025Q1 as total debt expanded about 58% versus roughly 45% asset growth, while interest coverage fell to 2.78x from 3.99x in 2024Q2, a trajectory that, based on recent balance sheet data, warrants maturity scrutiny.
The leverage level places EPRT between Agree Realty at 0.53 and NNN at 1.09, so aggregate gearing is not aggressive, but the direction of travel matters more than the level: debt has grown faster than assets for ten consecutive quarters while coverage has declined each time it was tested. A 2.78x coverage ratio leaves less cushion for spread compression between borrowing costs and the 1-2% contractual escalators embedded in the portfolio, which may indicate that incremental debt is funding growth at progressively thinner margins. The combination of a $25.2M cash balance against $3.0 billion of debt leaves limited internal liquidity, so refinancing terms and any fixed-rate versus floating exposure would be the natural items to track next.
P/E and D/E Both Mislead Here
The most commonly misapplied ratio is EPRT's 20.84x P/E, which reflects $60.2M of GAAP depreciation against $107.1M of FFO and understates earning power, yet even P/FFO at 20.92x masks negative AFFO of $0.90 per share, as financial statements indicate.
Depreciation on a long-held net lease portfolio routinely diverges from economic reality, so P/E suggests a cheaper entry point than exists, while debt-to-equity built on amortized book equity overstates balance sheet strength relative to debt-to-gross-assets, which would show $3.0 billion of debt against a $7.7 billion base. The more consequential misapplication is treating the 65.5% FFO payout ratio as the dividend safety metric, because FFO excludes leasing capital, recurring capital outlays and straight-line rent, all of which appear to drive AFFO into negative territory and would put the true payout ratio well above 100%. The appropriate lens is therefore AFFO-based coverage alongside debt-to-gross-assets; substituting either one would likely shift the risk conclusion from adequate toward strained, and the discrepancy warrants further investigation before relying on headline ratios.