Four Corners Property Trust vs LandBridge
FCPT and LB side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FCPT and LB compare
LandBridge is the larger company, worth 2.2 times as much as Four Corners Property Trust ($5.6B against $2.6B).
On earnings, Four Corners Property Trust is cheaper: it trades at 21.5× trailing earnings, against 62.3× for LandBridge.
LandBridge grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (37.3% versus 10.2% for Four Corners Property Trust).
Four Corners Property Trust keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 37.5% compared with 17.1% at LandBridge.
Both pay dividends: Four Corners Property Trust yields 4.7% and LandBridge 0.63%.
Four Corners Property Trust scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 10 for LandBridge), 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 | FCPT | LB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.6B | $5.6B |
| Share price | $23.39 | $72.90 |
| Change, 1 year | −3.1% | −2.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −17.2% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.43 | −0.57 |
| Employees | 496 | 5 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.5× (better) | 62.3× |
| P/S | 8.1× (better) | 22.9× |
| P/B | – | 14.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 39.6× |
| P/FCF | – | 33.7× |
| FCF yield | – | 3.0% |
| Fair value | $25.17 | $19.11 |
| Margin of safety | 7.1% (better) | −281% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.2% | 37.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.5% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 8.7% | 71.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 0.00% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 0.18% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | – | 63.4% |
| Net margin | 37.5% (better) | 17.1% |
| FCF margin | – | 67.8% |
| Return on equity | – | 12.7% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 15.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 1.94 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 4.28 |
| Current ratio | – | 2.78 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.95 | 4.84 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.7% (better) | 0.63% |
| Payout ratio | 155% | 147% |
| Years of dividend growth | 9 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 3.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | −5.5% | – |
| Shareholder yield | −0.81% | 0.63% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 103% | 36.9% |
| Held by insiders | 1.3% | – |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $793K (better) | −$191M |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.3% | – |
Go deeper
- FCPT stock overview
- FCPT income statement
- FCPT valuation and score
- LB stock overview
- LB income statement
- LB valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.