Ellington Financial vs Terreno Realty
EFC and TRNO side by side, both in real estate. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How EFC and TRNO compare
Terreno Realty is the larger company, worth 5.1 times as much as Ellington Financial ($7.3B against $1.4B).
On earnings, Ellington Financial is cheaper: it trades at 6.8× trailing earnings, against 20.2× for Terreno Realty.
Ellington Financial grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (48.5% versus 17.2% for Terreno Realty).
Terreno Realty keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 68.1% compared with 41.8% at Ellington Financial.
Both pay dividends: Ellington Financial yields 12.8% and Terreno Realty 3.2%.
Ellington Financial scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 12 for Terreno Realty), 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 | EFC | TRNO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.4B | $7.3B |
| Share price | $11.17 | $67.31 |
| Change, 1 year | −15.9% | 10.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −36.9% | −13.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.80 | 0.83 |
| Employees | 500 | 47 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 6.8× (better) | 20.2× |
| P/S | 2.9× (better) | 14.1× |
| P/B | 0.7× (better) | 1.6× |
| PEG | – | 1.40 |
| Fair value | $20.27 | $61.73 |
| Margin of safety | 44.9% (better) | −9.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 48.5% (better) | 17.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 48.5% (better) | 20.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 62.0% (better) | 10.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 24.1% (better) | 6.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 25.0% | 27.5% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | 41.8% | 68.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | 10.9% (better) | 8.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Altman Z-score | 0.04 | 3.75 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 12.8% (better) | 3.2% |
| Payout ratio | 104% | 62.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 315% (better) | 12.5% |
| Buyback yield | −22.4% | −6.0% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | −9.6% | −2.8% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 49.9% | 106% |
| Held by insiders | 1.2% | 1.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$1.6M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.2% | 5.7% |
Go deeper
- EFC stock overview
- EFC income statement
- EFC valuation and score
- TRNO stock overview
- TRNO income statement
- TRNO valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.