Kimco Realty vs OUTFRONT Media
KIM and OUT side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How KIM and OUT compare
Kimco Realty is the larger company, worth 2.9 times as much as OUTFRONT Media ($17.0B against $5.9B).
On earnings, OUTFRONT Media is cheaper: it trades at 23.1× trailing earnings, against 23.9× for Kimco Realty.
OUTFRONT Media grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.1% versus 3.5% for Kimco Realty).
Kimco Realty keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 34.1% compared with 13.1% at OUTFRONT Media.
Both pay dividends: Kimco Realty yields 4.1% and OUTFRONT Media 3.7%.
Kimco Realty scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 9 for OUTFRONT Media), 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 | KIM | OUT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $17.0B | $5.9B |
| Share price | $25.62 | $33.67 |
| Change, 1 year | 26.0% | 66.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 7.3% | 20.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.81 | 1.48 |
| Employees | 710 | 1,986 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.9× | 23.1× (better) |
| P/S | 7.7× | 3.0× (better) |
| P/B | 1.7× (better) | 8.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.1× (better) | 15.0× |
| P/FCF | – | 17.2× |
| FCF yield | – | 5.8% |
| Fair value | $24.86 | $25.84 |
| Margin of safety | −3.1% (better) | −30.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.5% | 9.1% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 15.1% (better) | 8.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 24.8% | 108% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 28.9% | 115% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 40.1% (better) | 20.7% |
| Net margin | 34.1% (better) | 13.1% |
| FCF margin | – | 17.4% |
| Return on equity | 7.3% | 41.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 8.8% | 13.0% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 3.59 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 4.39 |
| Interest coverage | 2.6× | – |
| Current ratio | – | 0.72 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.31 (better) | 0.86 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.1% (better) | 3.7% |
| Payout ratio | – | 84.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 13.3% | 25.9% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 1.9% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 6.0% (better) | 3.7% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100% | 104% |
| Held by insiders | 2.3% | 15.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$199K (better) | −$4.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.2% | 5.2% |
Go deeper
- KIM stock overview
- KIM income statement
- KIM valuation and score
- OUT stock overview
- OUT income statement
- OUT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.