Easterly Government Properties vs LandBridge
DEA 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 DEA and LB compare
LandBridge is the larger company, worth 5.4 times as much as Easterly Government Properties ($5.6B against $1.0B).
On earnings, LandBridge is cheaper: it trades at 62.5× trailing earnings, against 76.1× for Easterly Government Properties.
LandBridge grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (37.3% versus 11.4% for Easterly Government Properties).
LandBridge keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 17.1% compared with 4.0% at Easterly Government Properties.
Both pay dividends: Easterly Government Properties yields 6.1% and LandBridge 0.63%.
Easterly Government Properties scores higher on the StockData Score (13 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 | DEA | LB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.0B | $5.6B |
| Share price | $22.06 | $73.15 |
| Change, 1 year | 3.2% | −10.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −58.5% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.55 | −0.56 |
| Employees | 55 | 5 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 76.1× | 62.5× (better) |
| P/S | 2.9× (better) | 23.0× |
| P/B | 0.8× (better) | 14.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 39.7× |
| P/FCF | – | 33.9× |
| FCF yield | – | 3.0% |
| Fair value | $23.29 | $18.98 |
| Margin of safety | 5.3% (better) | −285% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 11.4% | 37.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.5% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 4.6% | 71.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −6.5% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −6.4% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 77.2% | – |
| Operating margin | – | 63.4% |
| Net margin | 4.0% | 17.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 67.8% |
| Return on equity | 1.1% | 12.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | – | 15.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 1.94 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 4.28 |
| Current ratio | – | 2.78 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.48 | 4.85 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 6.1% (better) | 0.63% |
| Payout ratio | 604% | 147% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −5.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | −2.0% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 4.1% (better) | 0.63% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 77.8% | 36.9% |
| Held by insiders | 13.6% | – |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$191M |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.5% | – |
Go deeper
- DEA stock overview
- DEA income statement
- DEA 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.