Cousins Properties vs SL Green Realty
CUZ and SLG side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CUZ and SLG compare
Cousins Properties is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as SL Green Realty ($4.9B against $3.5B).
Cousins Properties grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.5% versus 8.5% for SL Green Realty).
Cousins Properties keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.4% compared with −16.9% at SL Green Realty.
Both pay dividends: Cousins Properties yields 4.3% and SL Green Realty 4.3%.
SL Green Realty scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 8 for Cousins Properties), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | CUZ | SLG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.9B | $3.5B |
| Share price | $29.64 | $49.00 |
| Change, 1 year | 13.5% | −1.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −24.3% | −35.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.91 | 1.30 |
| Employees | 351 | 1,289 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 | 3 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 1 |
| Health score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 329× | – |
| P/S | 4.7× | 3.3× (better) |
| P/B | 1.1× | 1.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 4.3× | 3.4× (better) |
| Fair value | $34.35 | $87.91 |
| Margin of safety | 13.7% | 44.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.5% (better) | 8.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.1% (better) | −0.96% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −74.2% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −74.3% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −31.6% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 68.4% | – |
| Operating margin | 68.3% (better) | 66.6% |
| Net margin | 1.4% (better) | −16.9% |
| Return on equity | 0.32% (better) | −4.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.3% | 16.0% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | 4.0× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.05 (better) | 0.44 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.3% (better) | 4.3% |
| Payout ratio | 1445% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 1.3% (better) | −11.0% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.01% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.3% (better) | 4.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 105% | 99.3% |
| Held by insiders | 1.1% | 0.36% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$178K (better) | −$3.6M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.1% | 18.1% |
Go deeper
- CUZ stock overview
- CUZ income statement
- CUZ valuation and score
- SLG stock overview
- SLG income statement
- SLG valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.