Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Welltower Inc.
How Welltower Inc. stacks up
WELL · against 662 other Real Estate companies
Valuation
12/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #579 of 663 · scores higher than 12% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score67 peers with a valuation score of 10–19, including WELL · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 12?
Weighted metrics compared with all Real Estate companies.Mainly because of its EBITDA yield, free cash flow yield and earnings yield, which are weaker than most Real Estate peers.
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 81% of peers. EBITDA yield: 1.7% vs peer median 5.4%
- less free cash flow for the price paid: weaker than 81% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 1.2% vs peer median 6.5%
- lower earnings for the price paid: weaker than 74% of peers. Earnings yield: 0.9% vs peer median 5.3%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = WELL, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | WELL | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 708 reported | 0.9% | 5.3% | 26% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 681 reported | 1.7% | 5.3% | 19% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 307 reported | 1.7% | 6.8% | 19% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 724 reported | 26.8% | 112.8% | 7% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around WELL| 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 | |
| 579 | 14.3B MXN (≈$772M) | 12 | 51 | |
| 579 |
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