Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to AGNC Investment Corp.
How AGNC Investment Corp. stacks up
AGNC · against 662 other Real Estate companies
Valuation
87/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #84 of 663 · scores higher than 87% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score66 peers with a valuation score of 80–89, including AGNC · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 87?
Weighted metrics compared with all Real Estate companies.Mainly thanks to its free cash flow yield, which is stronger than most Real Estate peers.
- lower earnings for the price paid: weaker than 76% of peers. Earnings yield: 21.7% vs peer median 5.3%
- EBITDA yield is not reported, so it is left out of the score.
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 71% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 11.2% vs peer median 6.5%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = AGNC, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | AGNC | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 708 reported | 0.6% | 5.3% | 24% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 681 reported | Not reported | 5.3% | — | — | 50% |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 307 reported | 11.2% | 6.8% | 71% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 724 reported | 89.1% | 112.8% | 36% | Context only |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around AGNC| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 227M MYR (≈$50M) | 100 | 80 | |
| 1 | 6.0B BRL (≈$1.1B) | 100 | 91 | |
| 3 | 394M HKD (≈$50M) | 99 | 33 | |
| 3 | 2.9B HKD (≈$365M) | 99 | 76 | |
| 3 | 3.2B HKD (≈$407M) | 99 | 66 | |
| 78 | 60.7B TRY (≈$1.8B) | 88 | 79 | |
| 78 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score