Alexandria Real Estate Equities vs Lamar Advertising
ARE and LAMR side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ARE and LAMR compare
Lamar Advertising is the larger company, worth 2.2 times as much as Alexandria Real Estate Equities ($16.4B against $7.6B).
Lamar Advertising grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.4% versus −9.9% for Alexandria Real Estate Equities).
Lamar Advertising keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 23.9% compared with −51.8% at Alexandria Real Estate Equities.
Both pay dividends: Alexandria Real Estate Equities yields 6.6% and Lamar Advertising 4.1%.
Lamar Advertising scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 7 for Alexandria Real Estate Equities), 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 | ARE | LAMR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.6B | $16.4B |
| Share price | $43.84 | $161.76 |
| Change, 1 year | −18.5% | 26.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −78.8% | 41.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.00 | 1.03 |
| Employees | 514 | 3,500 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 10 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 29.5× |
| P/S | 2.8× (better) | 7.1× |
| P/B | 0.5× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 18.5× |
| P/FCF | – | 22.9× |
| PEG | – | 2.89 |
| FCF yield | – | 4.4% |
| Fair value | $88.95 | $111.88 |
| Margin of safety | 50.7% (better) | −44.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −9.9% | 4.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.9% (better) | 7.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 26.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 27.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 19.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 67.4% |
| Operating margin | – | 31.8% |
| Net margin | −51.8% | 23.9% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 30.9% |
| Return on equity | −9.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 3.20 |
| Interest coverage | – | 4.5× |
| Current ratio | – | 0.63 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.37 | 2.04 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 6.6% (better) | 4.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.0% | 20.9% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.00% (better) | −0.10% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.6% (better) | 4.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.4% | 84.4% |
| Held by insiders | 1.7% | 13.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $1.3M (better) | −$4.9M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.8% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- ARE stock overview
- ARE income statement
- ARE valuation and score
- LAMR stock overview
- LAMR income statement
- LAMR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.