ARI Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Franklin BSP Realty Trust has a net margin of 52.12% compared to Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's net margin of 22.36%. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's return on equity of -5.98% beat Franklin BSP Realty Trust's return on equity of 6.18%.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a consensus price target of $9.50, signalling upside risk potential of 3.15%. On the other hand Franklin BSP Realty Trust has an analysts' consensus of $15.40 which suggests that it could grow by 32.42%. Given that Franklin BSP Realty Trust has higher upside potential than Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance, analysts believe Franklin BSP Realty Trust is more attractive than Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a beta of 1.408, which suggesting that the stock is 40.761% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Franklin BSP Realty Trust has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share corresponding to a yield of 11.94%. Franklin BSP Realty Trust offers a yield of 12.21% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.36 per share. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance pays -165.69% of its earnings as a dividend. Franklin BSP Realty Trust pays out 151.14% of its earnings as a dividend.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance quarterly revenues are $78M, which are smaller than Franklin BSP Realty Trust quarterly revenues of $136.5M. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's net income of $40.7M is higher than Franklin BSP Realty Trust's net income of $30.5M. Notably, Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's price-to-earnings ratio is 164.72x while Franklin BSP Realty Trust's PE ratio is 14.01x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance is 6.58x versus 1.73x for Franklin BSP Realty Trust. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Four Corners Property Trust has a net margin of 52.12% compared to Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's net margin of 38.31%. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's return on equity of -5.98% beat Four Corners Property Trust's return on equity of 7.62%.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a consensus price target of $9.50, signalling upside risk potential of 3.15%. On the other hand Four Corners Property Trust has an analysts' consensus of $30.25 which suggests that it could grow by 9.17%. Given that Four Corners Property Trust has higher upside potential than Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance, analysts believe Four Corners Property Trust is more attractive than Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a beta of 1.408, which suggesting that the stock is 40.761% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Four Corners Property Trust has a beta of 0.931, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 6.934%.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share corresponding to a yield of 11.94%. Four Corners Property Trust offers a yield of 5.05% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.36 per share. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance pays -165.69% of its earnings as a dividend. Four Corners Property Trust pays out 127.5% of its earnings as a dividend.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance quarterly revenues are $78M, which are larger than Four Corners Property Trust quarterly revenues of $68.3M. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's net income of $40.7M is higher than Four Corners Property Trust's net income of $26.2M. Notably, Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's price-to-earnings ratio is 164.72x while Four Corners Property Trust's PE ratio is 25.90x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance is 6.58x versus 9.71x for Four Corners Property Trust. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

InvenTrust Properties has a net margin of 52.12% compared to Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's net margin of 13.76%. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's return on equity of -5.98% beat InvenTrust Properties's return on equity of 0.84%.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a consensus price target of $9.50, signalling upside risk potential of 3.15%. On the other hand InvenTrust Properties has an analysts' consensus of $33.0000 which suggests that it could grow by 19.01%. Given that InvenTrust Properties has higher upside potential than Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance, analysts believe InvenTrust Properties is more attractive than Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a beta of 1.408, which suggesting that the stock is 40.761% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison InvenTrust Properties has a beta of -6.284, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 728.389%.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share corresponding to a yield of 11.94%. InvenTrust Properties offers a yield of 3.31% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.24 per share. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance pays -165.69% of its earnings as a dividend. InvenTrust Properties pays out 459.65% of its earnings as a dividend.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance quarterly revenues are $78M, which are larger than InvenTrust Properties quarterly revenues of $71.2M. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's net income of $40.7M is higher than InvenTrust Properties's net income of $9.8M. Notably, Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's price-to-earnings ratio is 164.72x while InvenTrust Properties's PE ratio is 154.06x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance is 6.58x versus 7.17x for InvenTrust Properties. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Redfin has a net margin of 52.12% compared to Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's net margin of -14.89%. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's return on equity of -5.98% beat Redfin's return on equity of -1694.25%.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a consensus price target of $9.50, signalling upside risk potential of 3.15%. On the other hand Redfin has an analysts' consensus of $10.58 which suggests that it could grow by 15.13%. Given that Redfin has higher upside potential than Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance, analysts believe Redfin is more attractive than Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a beta of 1.408, which suggesting that the stock is 40.761% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Redfin has a beta of 2.565, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 156.49%.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance has a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share corresponding to a yield of 11.94%. Redfin offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance pays -165.69% of its earnings as a dividend. Redfin pays out -0.22% of its earnings as a dividend.

Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance quarterly revenues are $78M, which are smaller than Redfin quarterly revenues of $244.3M. Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's net income of $40.7M is higher than Redfin's net income of -$36.4M. Notably, Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance's price-to-earnings ratio is 164.72x while Redfin's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance is 6.58x versus 1.07x for Redfin. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.