SGD Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

FRP Holdings has a net margin of -2883.88% compared to Safe & Green Development's net margin of 15.94%. Safe & Green Development's return on equity of -- beat FRP Holdings's return on equity of 1.4%.

Safe & Green Development has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand FRP Holdings has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Safe & Green Development has higher upside potential than FRP Holdings, analysts believe Safe & Green Development is more attractive than FRP Holdings.

Safe & Green Development has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison FRP Holdings has a beta of 0.533, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 46.691%.

Safe & Green Development has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. FRP Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Safe & Green Development pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. FRP Holdings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Safe & Green Development quarterly revenues are $81.2K, which are smaller than FRP Holdings quarterly revenues of $10.5M. Safe & Green Development's net income of -$2.3M is lower than FRP Holdings's net income of $1.7M. Notably, Safe & Green Development's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while FRP Holdings's PE ratio is 78.03x. 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 Safe & Green Development is 4.50x versus 12.04x for FRP Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Gaming and Leisure Properties has a net margin of -2883.88% compared to Safe & Green Development's net margin of 55.75%. Safe & Green Development's return on equity of -- beat Gaming and Leisure Properties's return on equity of 17.22%.

Safe & Green Development has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Gaming and Leisure Properties has an analysts' consensus of $55.50 which suggests that it could grow by 18.36%. Given that Gaming and Leisure Properties has higher upside potential than Safe & Green Development, analysts believe Gaming and Leisure Properties is more attractive than Safe & Green Development.

Safe & Green Development has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Gaming and Leisure Properties has a beta of 0.743, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 25.703%.

Safe & Green Development has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Gaming and Leisure Properties offers a yield of 6.48% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.76 per share. Safe & Green Development pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Gaming and Leisure Properties pays out 105.88% of its earnings as a dividend.

Safe & Green Development quarterly revenues are $81.2K, which are smaller than Gaming and Leisure Properties quarterly revenues of $389.6M. Safe & Green Development's net income of -$2.3M is lower than Gaming and Leisure Properties's net income of $217.2M. Notably, Safe & Green Development's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Gaming and Leisure Properties's PE ratio is 16.34x. 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 Safe & Green Development is 4.50x versus 8.38x for Gaming and Leisure Properties. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Manhattan Bridge Capital has a net margin of -2883.88% compared to Safe & Green Development's net margin of 70.33%. Safe & Green Development's return on equity of -- beat Manhattan Bridge Capital's return on equity of 12.96%.

Safe & Green Development has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Manhattan Bridge Capital has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 42.28%. Given that Manhattan Bridge Capital has higher upside potential than Safe & Green Development, analysts believe Manhattan Bridge Capital is more attractive than Safe & Green Development.

Safe & Green Development has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Manhattan Bridge Capital has a beta of 0.260, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 74.032%.

Safe & Green Development has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Manhattan Bridge Capital offers a yield of 9.35% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.12 per share. Safe & Green Development pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Manhattan Bridge Capital pays out 93.61% of its earnings as a dividend. Manhattan Bridge Capital's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Safe & Green Development quarterly revenues are $81.2K, which are smaller than Manhattan Bridge Capital quarterly revenues of $1.9M. Safe & Green Development's net income of -$2.3M is lower than Manhattan Bridge Capital's net income of $1.3M. Notably, Safe & Green Development's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Manhattan Bridge Capital's PE ratio is 10.04x. 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 Safe & Green Development is 4.50x versus 7.64x for Manhattan Bridge Capital. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

SBA Communications has a net margin of -2883.88% compared to Safe & Green Development's net margin of 25.03%. Safe & Green Development's return on equity of -- beat SBA Communications's return on equity of --.

Safe & Green Development has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand SBA Communications has an analysts' consensus of $247.71 which suggests that it could grow by 17.51%. Given that SBA Communications has higher upside potential than Safe & Green Development, analysts believe SBA Communications is more attractive than Safe & Green Development.

Safe & Green Development has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison SBA Communications has a beta of 0.831, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 16.905%.

Safe & Green Development has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. SBA Communications offers a yield of 1.91% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.11 per share. Safe & Green Development pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. SBA Communications pays out 56.59% of its earnings as a dividend. SBA Communications's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Safe & Green Development quarterly revenues are $81.2K, which are smaller than SBA Communications quarterly revenues of $693.7M. Safe & Green Development's net income of -$2.3M is lower than SBA Communications's net income of $173.6M. Notably, Safe & Green Development's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while SBA Communications's PE ratio is 30.58x. 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 Safe & Green Development is 4.50x versus 8.56x for SBA Communications. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.