Net Lease Office Properties vs Transcontinental Realty Investors
NLOP and TCI side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How NLOP and TCI compare
Transcontinental Realty Investors is the larger company, worth 3.0 times as much as Net Lease Office Properties ($419M against $141M).
On earnings, Net Lease Office Properties is cheaper: it trades at 7.8× trailing earnings, against 56.9× for Transcontinental Realty Investors.
Transcontinental Realty Investors grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.9% versus −55.1% for Net Lease Office Properties).
Net Lease Office Properties keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 34.8% compared with 14.1% at Transcontinental Realty Investors.
Net Lease Office Properties pays a dividend yielding 202%; Transcontinental Realty Investors does not pay one.
Net Lease Office Properties scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 6 for Transcontinental Realty Investors), 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 | NLOP | TCI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $141M | $419M |
| Share price | $9.54 | $47.79 |
| Change, 1 year | −68.1% | 5.9% |
| Change, 5 years | – | 25.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.06 | 0.15 |
| Employees | 197 | – |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 6 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 7.8× (better) | 56.9× |
| P/S | 2.7× (better) | 8.2× |
| P/B | 0.9× | 0.5× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 3.3× (better) | 75.2× |
| Fair value | $31.81 | $30.71 |
| Margin of safety | 70.0% (better) | −55.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −55.1% | 4.9% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | −3.0% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 28.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 31.3% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 15.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | – | −19.8% |
| Net margin | 34.8% (better) | 14.1% |
| Return on equity | 6.1% (better) | 0.85% |
| Return on invested capital | – | −1.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Interest coverage | – | −1.1× |
| Altman Z-score | 6.49 (better) | 1.67 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 202% (better) | 0.00% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Shareholder yield | 202% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 56.2% | 3.8% |
| Held by insiders | 4.9% | 85.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | $7.8M |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.0% | 1.7% |
Go deeper
- NLOP stock overview
- NLOP income statement
- NLOP valuation and score
- TCI stock overview
- TCI income statement
- TCI valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.