O › analyze
O · Analyze
Price at analysis: $61.80-61.94 | 52wk range $55.86-67.94 | Monthly-dividend net-lease REIT, "The Monthly Dividend Company"
First /analyze on O. It sits on the Watchlist as the AHRT replacement, income sleeve, entry
previously written as $50-55 (13% below spot, no conviction number set).
0. Knowledge check
python .mcp/kb.py find on "O" and "Realty Income" returned no dedicated note, but O is directly
named in three live notes that gate this entire analysis:
principle-reit-wacc-has-no-tax-shield— names O explicitly (beta 0.720, "highest beta, lowest cost of equity" among net-lease peers) and is the reason this report does not use CAPM off beta or an after-tax cost of debt. Applied below; the backward-solve check it prescribes reproduces the market price almost exactly.pitfall-vendor-feeds-misread-sales-type-lease-reits— documents the same vendor family (zeroed acquisition line, GAAP-payout-ratio trap) on VICI and NLCP. Both errors fire on O too — see Data Traps below.pitfall-adjusted-close-breaks-multiple-bands— governs how any historical multiple band must be built. This report avoids the trap by not touching Yahoo's adjusted price series at all; the multiple work below uses company-reported AFFO/share and the current quote only.Knowledge/Themes/reits.md(sweep, 2026-07-14) flags that REIT screening has never been paired with a/macrorun — same gap here; the 10yr print used below (4.68%, 2026-08-27) is a spot check, not a/macrosnapshot.pitfall-dyt-inverts-when-price-caused-the-yield— checked and did not fire cleanly either way; see §3.
1. REIT Health (AFFO overlay — no Graham IV, no GAAP EPS)
Per analysis_notes.md §4, this REIT's earnings measure is AFFO, not net income. fin.py's
auto-computed Graham IV ($35.89) and PE(ttm) (45.11x) are deliberately not used — they are
a GAAP-EPS artifact on a company whose GAAP income is suppressed by real-estate depreciation.
AFFO per share, company-reported (10-Q/8-K, not vendor-derived):
| Period | AFFO/sh | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| FY2022 | $3.92 | — |
| FY2024 | $4.19 | — |
| FY2025 (actual) | $4.28 | +2.1% |
| Q3'25 | $1.08 | — |
| Q4'25 | $1.08 | — |
| Q1'26 | $1.13 | +6.6% |
| Q2'26 | $1.09 | +3.8% |
| TTM (Q3'25-Q2'26) | $4.38 | — |
| FY2026 guidance (raised twice this year) | $4.44-$4.45 | ~4.0% |
3yr AFFO/share CAGR (FY22→FY25) ≈ 3.0%. This is a mature, single-digit compounder, not a growth story — consistent with a $89B-asset REIT that must now deploy ~$10B/yr just to keep growth in the mid-single digits.
AFFO payout ratio — the only payout ratio worth reporting for this name:
| Basis | Payout |
|---|---|
| TTM ($3.252 annualized dividend ÷ $4.38 TTM AFFO) | 74.2% |
| FY2026 guide ($3.252 ÷ $4.445 midpoint) | 73.2% |
Well covered, with real retained cash flow — not a fixed 90%+ formula payout. This is the
opposite finding from fin.py's vendor PayoutRatio field of 2.36 (236%), which is the
same GAAP-EPS trap documented on NLCP in the pitfall note. See Data Traps.
Occupancy / portfolio quality (Q2 2026, company-reported): - Occupancy 98.8%, blended rent recapture 102.7%, renewal spread 104.6% — structurally high and stable; O rarely dips below 98% even in downturns. - WALT 8.6 years; only 1.5% of ABR expires in 2026, 40.5% beyond 2034. - Investment-grade tenants 34.3% of ABR (up from 32% prior quarter). - Top tenant (Dollar General) 3.3% of ABR, top 20 tenants 34.8% — genuinely diversified; no single credit event can move the portfolio. - 91% of retail ABR is non-discretionary, service-based, or low-price-point. - Largest industry bucket: dollar stores 9.9% of ABR (see Key Risks).
Balance sheet: net debt/adjusted EBITDAre 5.4x, fixed-charge coverage 4.7x, net debt/TEV 34.3%, credit rating A- / A3 (S&P/Moody's). $3.0B of new debt issued YTD 2026 at a blended coupon of 3.9% (mix of USD and a lower-coupon EUR tranche); the most recent USD-only print (Apr 2026, 4.750% notes due 2033) priced at an effective 5.047% yield — the right marginal cost-of-debt input, not the blended 3.9% figure, which is currency-mixed.
The investment spread — the central finding of this report.
Per principle-reit-wacc-has-no-tax-shield, a REIT's WACC must use a pre-tax cost of debt
(O's effective tax rate is near zero — no shield to apply) and a market-implied cost of
equity, not naive CAPM (which is shown in that note to invert for net-lease REITs).
| Input | Value | Method |
|---|---|---|
| Kd (pre-tax, marginal) | 5.05% | Apr-2026 USD notes, effective yield |
| Ke (Gordon: D/P + g) | ~8.8% | $3.252 ÷ $61.85 = 5.26% + g≈3.5% |
| Ke (CAPM, for comparison only) | ~7.85% | Rf 4.68% (10yr, 2026-08-27) + 0.72 × 4.4% ERP |
| Debt weight (net debt/TEV) | 34.3% | company-reported |
| WACC (pre-tax Kd, Gordon Ke) | ≈7.5% | 0.343×5.05% + 0.657×8.8% |
| New investment cap rate (blended, Q1-Q2 2026) | ≈7.2% | 7.1% (Q1) / 7.3% (Q2) initial cash yield |
| Spread | ≈ −0.3% | roughly breakeven to slightly negative |
Sanity check (the note's prescribed backward-solve): P = D/(Ke-g) at Ke 8.8%, g 3.5% gives
$61.36, against an actual price of $61.80-61.94 — a near-exact match. The market is pricing O
consistent with roughly an 8.8% required return and 3.5% perpetual growth; the inputs are coherent.
What this means: O is not currently creating a value-accretive spread on new capital funded at its blended cost of capital. Debt-funded deployment (5.05% cost vs 7.2% cap rate) is still accretive; equity-funded deployment at an 8.8% true cost of equity is not. This is exactly why management has shifted funding mix — public equity funded only 18% of YTD 2026 investment volume versus a 47% three-year average, replaced by private-capital JVs and fee-bearing co-investment (the same near-zero-spread finding already on file for VICI). AFFO/share growth (~4%) is coming mostly from contractual rent escalators on the existing book and the debt-funded/private-capital slice of new deployment, not from a wide reinvestment spread.
2. Moat
- Real, scale-based diversification is the actual moat — 3.3% max single-tenant exposure, 34.8% top-20, 91% non-discretionary/service tenant base. This is expensive to replicate; it took three decades of accumulation and is the reason O carries an A- rating few net-lease peers can match.
- Adversarial stress-test: the core strategy (buy a building, lease it back to the seller
on a long NNN lease) is not technically hard to copy. What is hard to copy is doing it at
O's scale with O's cost of capital. That edge is narrowing — institutional and private capital
(Blue Owl, KKR, and a newly reported Apollo-Realty Income joint venture) are flooding into the
same sale-leaseback trade, which is the mechanism compressing cap rates across the whole
net-lease field (matches
Knowledge/Themes/reits.md's July finding and the VICI "near-zero spread" precedent). - Data center JV (announced with Q2 2026 results): $6B programmatic agreement with Cloud Capital, O taking up to $1.4B for a 45% interest in hyperscale data centers, 100% pre-leased to IG tenants on 15-20yr NNN terms. A real, early-stage adjacency, but O has no structural edge in data centers versus specialized REITs (Digital Realty, Equinix) or infrastructure funds — it is renting its balance sheet and capital-raising ability, not a technical moat. Cap rates here are explicitly "in a discovery phase," per management, i.e. not yet proven to clear O's cost of capital either.
- Evergreen assessment: a durable, defensive income compounder, not a growth business. The ceiling is structural — deploying ~$10B/yr against an $89B base while the spread on the equity-funded slice is roughly zero caps AFFO/share growth in the 3-5%/yr range for the foreseeable future absent a rate-driven cap-rate re-widening.
3. Valuation
P/AFFO (not P/E — see REIT overlay): - TTM: $61.85 ÷ $4.38 = 14.1x - FY2026 guide: $61.85 ÷ $4.445 = 13.9x
No clean multi-year P/AFFO band is built here (per the adjusted-close pitfall guard, that would require pulling unadjusted historical prices, which this report did not do — flagged as a scope limit, not skipped silently). What is used instead, per the DYT pitfall's prescribed repair, is a spread-to-Treasury reset:
- Current yield 5.26% vs 10yr Treasury 4.68% (2026-08-27) → spread ≈58bp.
fin.py's 5yr-average yield (5.07%) sits barely below today's (5.22-5.26%) — DYT's naive signal is close to neutral, not a strong buy, so the naive band is not being overridden by a screaming discount either way.- O has historically traded at a wider spread to the 10yr than 58bp during normal-rate regimes (the 2021 band was set at a ~1.4% 10yr and is a bubble-era reference per the same pitfall family that corrected VICI's band) — 58bp today reads as tight, not cheap, on a spread basis.
Fair-value range, combining the DDM/Gordon sensitivity band and a 13-15x forward P/AFFO range on FY2026 guidance:
| Method | Range |
|---|---|
| DDM sensitivity (Ke 8.5-9.0%, g 3.0-4.0%) | $58 - $72 |
| P/AFFO 13-15x on FY26 AFFO $4.445 | $58 - $67 |
| Combined fair value | $58 - $70, central ≈ $63-64 |
Spot price ($61.85) sits inside this range, near the low-middle — fairly valued, not cheap. The existing Watchlist entry ($50-55) corresponds to ~11.3-12.4x FY26 AFFO and a 5.9-6.5% yield (a spread-to-10yr of ~120-180bp) — that is a genuine discount zone under this framework, not merely "13% below spot." This report's own entry read is set slightly higher, $52-58, to reflect the AFFO base having grown since the prior entry was likely set.
Trim: 17x forward AFFO (FY2026 guide $4.445) → ≈$75-76. Basis: 17x sits near the top of O's post-2022 (higher-rate-regime) trading range; a return to its older 18-20x, low-rate-era multiple is treated as unlikely to recur absent a genuine rate-cutting cycle, so it is not used as the ceiling.
4. Sentiment
- Q2 2026 (reported 2026-08-12) beat and raised FY2026 AFFO guidance for the second time this year, to $4.44-$4.45. Full-year investment-volume guidance raised to $10B.
- Sell-side: mean target $68.21 (20 analysts), but the underlying split is 8 buy / 15 hold /
1 sell — a hold-leaning consensus, not the aggressive buy the auto-generated "Recommendation:
buy" label in
fin.py's snapshot implies. - Insider activity: routine RSU/stock-award grants throughout, plus two small insider sales (General Counsel, ~$462k at $62.42, Apr 2026; a director, ~$665k at $60.43, Sep 2025) — not a red flag at this size, but no offsetting insider buying either.
- Stock is up from its 52wk low ($55.86) but still ~9% below its 52wk high ($67.94) — tracking the broader 2026 rate story rather than any company-specific news.
5. Key Risks
- Near-zero equity-funded investment spread. If private-capital/JV fee income growth disappoints or reverts toward the historical 47% public-equity funding mix, AFFO/share growth could slip toward the low end of the 3-4% range, or dip further if new-deal cap rates keep compressing under continued institutional capital inflow into net lease.
- Rate sensitivity with a thin cushion. O trades tight to the 10yr (58bp spread, versus a wider historical norm) — a renewed back-up in rates has less spread to absorb it than at past cycle lows, and O has historically been one of the more rate-correlated large-cap REITs.
- Dollar-store concentration. 9.9% of ABR is the single largest industry bucket; while spread across many individual leases (no single dollar-store tenant tops 3.3%), a sector-wide dollar-store credit event is a real tail risk given the category's episodic stress history.
- Data center JV is unproven. Early-stage, cap rates explicitly "in discovery," and no demonstrated structural edge versus specialized data-center REITs or infrastructure capital.
6. Synthesis
Fundamentals + Valuation carry the most weight here, per the framework's REIT-context weighting rule — this is a mature dividend REIT, not a moat-driven growth story. Both point the same direction: a genuinely high-quality, well-diversified, investment-grade income compounder that the market has priced close to fair value, not at a discount. The moat is real (diversification, cost of capital) but is compressing at the margin as private capital chases the same trade — the same dynamic already on file for VICI. AFFO growth (~4%) is real and well-covered (74% payout), but it is not being generated by a wide reinvestment spread right now; it is coming from existing lease escalators and non-dilutive private-capital structuring, which is a sensible management response to a compressed-spread environment rather than a red flag on its own.
Verdict: WATCH, conviction 6.0. A good business at a fair price is not a buy signal under this framework's first principle — it is a name to hold on the shelf for its entry zone. $52-58 is where the multiple/spread math turns into a genuine discount; $61.85 is not there yet.
Data Traps Hit
pitfall-vendor-feeds-misread-sales-type-lease-reits— confirmed, fires on O.fin.py's "Acquisitions" line shows $52.3M (FY2025) / $70.4M (FY2024) while O's own reported full-year 2025 investment volume was ~$5.5B, pacing to a $10B FY2026 guide — close to a 100x understatement. Same mechanism as VICI/NLCP: acquisitions booked as sales-type or financing-receivable lease investments don't map to the vendor's "Purchase of Business" line. Read total investing outflow or the supplemental's transaction page instead.- Same note, Error 3 — confirmed, fires on O.
fin.py's vendorPayoutRatioreads 2.36 (236%), computed off GAAP EPS. The true AFFO payout is 73-74% — a 160-point error in the direction that would (falsely) read the dividend as unsustainable. Exactly the NLCP pattern; worth adding O as a second live ticker on that note's tenant list. principle-reit-wacc-has-no-tax-shield— applied, not just cited. Built O's WACC with a pre-tax cost of debt and a Gordon-growth market-implied cost of equity instead of CAPM; the backward-solve check reproduced the actual price within ~1%, validating the inputs. This is the source of the central "near-zero spread" finding in this report.pitfall-dyt-inverts-when-price-caused-the-yield— checked, did not cleanly fire. Current yield is only marginally above its 5yr average, so the naive model does not manufacture a false buy signal here (unlike NVO/VICI). Used the spread-to-Treasury reset instead of a naive DYT number, per the note's prescribed repair.- Graham IV ($35.89) and GAAP PE(ttm) (45.1x) from
fin.py's snapshot were not used — both are meaningless for a REIT peranalysis_notes.md§4; flagged here only to record that they were seen and deliberately discarded, not overlooked.
Sources
python .mcp/fin.py O --news(2026-08-27)- Yahoo Finance MCP: quarterly cashflow, stock actions (dividend history), insider transactions
- Realty Income Q1 2026 / Q2 2026 earnings releases and supplementals (via WebSearch, SEC 8-K filings and realtyincome.com investor-relations pages)
- Motley Fool, Investing.com, Gurufocus, TipRanks Q2 2026 earnings-call coverage
- Trading Economics / CNBC — 10yr Treasury yield, 2026-08-27
Knowledge/Playbook/principle-reit-wacc-has-no-tax-shield.mdKnowledge/Playbook/pitfall-vendor-feeds-misread-sales-type-lease-reits.mdKnowledge/Playbook/pitfall-adjusted-close-breaks-multiple-bands.mdKnowledge/Playbook/pitfall-dyt-inverts-when-price-caused-the-yield.mdKnowledge/Themes/reits.md