Kimco Realty vs Regency Centers
KIM and REG 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 REG compare
Kimco Realty is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Regency Centers ($17.0B against $13.9B).
Regency Centers grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.2% versus 3.5% for Kimco Realty).
Regency Centers keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 34.4% compared with 34.1% at Kimco Realty.
Both pay dividends: Kimco Realty yields 4.1% and Regency Centers 4.0%.
Regency Centers scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 10 for Kimco 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 | KIM | REG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $17.0B | $13.9B |
| Share price | $25.55 | $76.11 |
| Change, 1 year | 24.1% | 8.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 7.0% | 3.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.81 | 0.66 |
| Employees | 710 | 507 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.9× | – |
| P/S | 7.7× (better) | 8.6× |
| P/B | 1.7× (better) | 2.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.1× | 8.8× (better) |
| Fair value | $24.75 | $69.18 |
| Margin of safety | −3.2% (better) | −10.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.5% | 8.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 15.1% (better) | 8.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 24.8% | 37.8% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 28.9% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 40.1% | 72.0% (better) |
| Net margin | 34.1% | 34.4% (better) |
| Return on equity | 7.3% | 8.2% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 8.8% | 13.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | 2.6× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.31 | 1.82 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | – |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.1% (better) | 4.0% |
| Payout ratio | – | 95.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | 12 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 13.3% (better) | 3.8% |
| Buyback yield | 1.9% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 6.0% (better) | 4.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100% | 101% |
| Held by insiders | 2.3% | 0.52% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$199K (better) | −$39.9M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.2% | – |
Go deeper
- KIM stock overview
- KIM income statement
- KIM valuation and score
- REG stock overview
- REG income statement
- REG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.