Watch · 48/100 · medium confidence

AGREE REALTY CORP (ADC-PA) — Council Assessment

🟡 WATCH · Score 48/100 · medium confidence

ADC-PA is a 4.25% fixed-rate perpetual REIT preferred trading ~31% below $25 par (~6.2% current yield) — a rate/duration income instrument, not a compounding equity, priced roughly fair with no catalyst.

As of 2026-06-26. 12 lenses weighed in, 6 abstained. Sources: 6 filings, 15 news.

360 narrative — news & sentiment digest

ADC (Agree Realty Corp) — Investment Briefing

Recent Developments

Dividend increase (Jun 2026): Monthly cash payouts rose 4.3%, with new July distribution dates announced.
Insider buying activity (May–Jun 2026):
- CEO Joey Agree purchased ~$1.0M in shares (May 18)
- Executive Chairman Richard Agree bought $357,050 in stock (Jun 8)
- Chair made additional 5,000-share open-market purchase (Jun 8)
- Director purchased 20,000 common shares (May 19)
- RSU grants to directors Linglong He and Karen Dearing (May 18)

Bull Narrative

Management confidence: Coordinated insider buying by CEO and executive chairman signals conviction in valuation and/or near-term prospects.
Dividend sustainability & growth: 4.3% payout increase demonstrates capacity to return capital; company appears on "best monthly dividend stocks" and "undervalued dividend" lists (Sure Dividend, Jan–Jun 2026).
Positive institutional sentiment: TradingKey coverage references "Institutional Confidence" analysis (Jun 17), suggesting institutional interest.

Bear Narrative

No substantive critique present in provided material; coverage is sparse and anodyne.

Retail Sentiment

Minimal retail forum chatter in dataset. Sentiment appears mixed-to-neutral, with focus on dividend yield and income stability rather than capital appreciation; retail positioning suggests this is viewed as a defensive, income-oriented holding.

Caveats

Thin coverage: No earnings call transcript, analyst commentary, or forward guidance provided. All material consists of headline aggregation and insider transaction notices.
No growth/profitability data: No clarity on revenue trends, margins, same-store sales, FFO/AFFO (typical REIT metrics), or capital allocation strategy beyond dividend.
Headline-only sources: TradingKey "earnings forecasts" and "technical analysis" are largely boilerplate; no substantive analysis.
Insider buying ambiguity: While multiple insiders bought stock, transaction sizes and price context are missing; cannot assess whether purchases reflect undervaluation or routine rebalancing.
Sector/peer context absent: No competitive positioning or real estate fundamentals data.

Recommendation: Obtain Q1/Q2 2026 earnings call transcript, FFO guidance, occupancy data, and rent-growth trends before investing.

Bull case

The underlying REIT (Agree Realty) is a conservatively financed, understandable net-lease retail platform with necessity-based, investment-grade tenants, $504M operating cash flow, D/E of 0.27, and 18.7% 3-yr revenue CAGR. Preferred dividend coverage is strong and asset backing is substantial ($6.27B equity vs $3.5B liabilities). The ~31% discount to par offers a nominal margin of safety and ~6.2% current yield, and coordinated open-market insider buying (CEO $1M, Chairman $357K) plus a 4.3% common dividend hike signal genuine management conviction in enterprise health, supporting credit quality for preferred holders. The AI-disruption referee (82) rightly notes the physical net-lease model is structurally immune to technological displacement.

Bear case

This is a below-market fixed coupon in a higher-for-longer rate world: Dalio, Marks, and Druckenmiller all flag extreme duration risk (~20yr effective duration) with issuer-callable, not holder-redeemable, optionality — asymmetry favors the issuer. There is no catalyst to close the par gap since management has no incentive to call a cheap-to-them coupon. The instrument captures none of the REIT's inflation pass-through or growth upside — it is pure credit risk at an unattractive yield. Preferred holders sit behind $3.5B of liabilities in a business that burns ~$370M FCF annually and depends on a $1.75B ATM to fund acquisitions. Marks warns it is a consensus-loved 'best dividend' name at its 52-week high with no fear priced in.

Dissent — where the council disagrees

The value bench splits hard: Graham (28) and Schloss (28) AVOID because the security sits at its 52-week high with a below-market coupon and no distress discount — antithetical to bargain-hunting — while Klarman (48) and the referee (55) call it fair-to-cheap on the par-discount/coverage math. Marks (32) AVOIDs on the grounds that too little fear is priced in and the crowd already owns it, directly contradicting the WATCH consensus. Crucially, most quality/growth lenses (Akre, Fisher, Greenblatt, Greenwald, Terry Smith, Druckenmiller) ABSTAINED because a fixed-coupon preferred simply doesn't fit their frameworks — so the WATCH is built on a thin base of income/rate specialists, not broad conviction. The tension that matters: this is a rate bet dressed as a value opportunity, and no one identifies a catalyst.

Key risks

Sustained higher/rising rates crush the perpetual 4.25% coupon further in real terms (extreme duration)
Issuer-callable, holder cannot redeem — asymmetry favors the company; no natural price-to-par catalyst
REIT dependence on continuous ATM equity/debt issuance ($1.75B program); capital markets freeze would stress the model
Stale/incomplete data: long-term debt figure is from 2021, and no FFO/AFFO, occupancy, or preferred call schedule provided
Preferred captures none of the common's inflation escalators or dividend growth — pure subordinated credit at low yield

Catalysts

Falling interest rates would lift the preferred price toward par and could prompt a call
Continued strong operating cash flow and dividend coverage reaffirming credit safety
Ongoing insider buying / balance-sheet de-risking supporting the credit
Improved disclosure (FFO/AFFO, call terms) that removes the current valuation uncertainty

DCF valuation

Not applicable: FCF-based DCF is not appropriate for Real Estate — banks/insurers are valued on P/B and ROE, REITs on P/FFO and cap rates.

Short-sell evaluation

🚫 AVOID SHORTING

Shorting ADC-PA is unattractive. This is a low-beta (0.48), range-bound (52wk $16.80–$18.44) fixed-coupon preferred already trading ~31% below par — the cheapness that would normally fuel a short thesis is absent because the discount reflects rate/duration, not fundamental impairment. The underlying REIT has strong dividend coverage ($504M OCF), a conservative balance sheet (D/E 0.27), substantial asset backing senior to common, and management is buying the common in size. A short carries a negative carry (you owe the ~6.2% coupon), limited downside room (already discounted), and squeeze/re-rating risk if rates fall. The forensic short-seller himself only reached WATCH (48), not a short thesis.

Pros (the short could work)

Fixed 4.25% coupon is structurally impaired in a higher-for-longer rate regime; further rate rises pressure price
Underlying REIT runs persistent negative FCF (-$370M) and depends on perpetual ATM issuance — vulnerable in a credit freeze
Stale debt data (2021) and missing FFO/AFFO obscure true leverage and coverage — an information gap
Sub-cost-of-capital ROIC/ROE (~3.4%) implies a value-destructive acquisition treadmill at the parent

Cons (what kills the short)

Negative carry: shorting a ~6.2%-yielding cumulative preferred means paying the dividend while you wait
Already ~31% below par — limited additional downside; the discount is rate-driven, not distress
Strong preferred coverage, conservative D/E (0.27), and large asset cushion senior to common
Coordinated insider buying and a 4.3% common dividend hike signal confidence — poor timing for a short
Low beta and extremely tight trading range mean no momentum or catalyst to drive a decline; squeeze/re-rating risk if rates fall

Council scorecard

Lens	School	Stance	Score	Conf
AI & Disruption Referee (Christensen-style)	referee	🟢 pass	82	high
Valuation Referee (Damodaran-style)	referee	🟡 watch	55	medium
Warren Buffett	quality	🟡 watch	52	medium
Charlie Munger	quality	🟡 watch	52	medium
Michael Mauboussin	quality	🟡 watch	52	medium
Ray Dalio	risk	🟡 watch	48	medium
Seth Klarman	value	🟡 watch	48	medium
Forensic Short-Seller (Chanos/Einhorn-style)	referee	🟡 watch	48	medium
Howard Marks	risk	🔴 avoid	32	medium
Benjamin Graham	value	🔴 avoid	28	medium
Walter Schloss	value	🔴 avoid	28	medium
Peter Lynch	growth	🔴 avoid	22	medium
Chuck Akre	quality	⚪ abstain	—	high
Stanley Druckenmiller	risk	⚪ abstain	—	high
Philip Fisher	growth	⚪ abstain	—	high
Joel Greenblatt	value	⚪ abstain	—	high
Bruce Greenwald	value	⚪ abstain	—	high
Terry Smith (Fundsmith)	quality	⚪ abstain	—	high

Member reasoning

AI & Disruption Referee (Christensen-style) — 🟢 pass · 82/100 · high confidence

Agree Realty Corporation is a net-lease REIT owning physical retail properties — predominantly necessity-based, service-oriented tenants (grocery, pharmacy, dollar stores, tire/auto, convenience). The core business is owning, leasing, and acquiring real estate under long-term triple-net leases. Through a Christensen disruption lens, this is one of the least AI-disrupted business models conceivable over a 3-10 year horizon. The 'job' the company does for customers is providing physical space under contractual occupancy arrangements — land and buildings are not software functions, not knowledge work, and not intermediary matching that AI can replicate or displace. The moat here is the physical asset itself, the lease contract, location scarcity, and the tenant credit underwriting competency. None of these are commoditized by LLMs. AI is a modest tailwind on the cost side (property underwriting analytics, tenant credit screening, lease administration automation, deal sourcing efficiency) and a minimal threat on the demand side — AI does not reduce a Dollar General's need for a physical store location. The disintermediation test fails here: there is no 'matching' function between two digital parties that a model can short-circuit. ADC owns the infrastructure; there is nothing to disintermediate. The most legitimate AI-adjacent risk is second-order: if AI accelerates brick-and-mortar retail decline for discretionary retail categories, tenant default rates could rise — but ADC's tenant roster is explicitly tilted toward necessity/e-commerce-resistant categories (TJX, Walmart-adjacent grocers, auto services, pharmacies), which is precisely why net-lease REITs of this profile survived the prior e-commerce wave. Hyperscaler platform risk is essentially zero — Amazon cannot bundle commercial real estate ownership into AWS. Management's silence on AI as a disruption risk is therefore appropriate rather than denial; the disclosure risk would be to acknowledge a threat that genuinely does not exist at material scale for this model. The one honest exposure worth flagging: if AI-driven productivity permanently reduces office-adjacent retail foot traffic or accelerates remote work hollowing of suburban retail corridors, some peripheral tenants face softness — but ADC's portfolio skews away from office-dependent retail. Revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years reflects an acquisition-driven model that AI does not impair. Capital allocation (the $1.75B ATM program) is a financing tool, not a sign of disruption pressure. Insider buying by CEO and executive chairman in May-June 2026 is consistent with a management team that sees no existential technology threat to their model.

Key points

Physical net-lease real estate is structurally immune to AI disintermediation — land and buildings cannot be replaced by a model or platform bundle
The 'job' ADC does (providing contractual physical occupancy) has no AI substitute; tenant demand for space is driven by logistics, foot traffic, and geography — not knowledge work
Necessity-based tenant mix (grocery, dollar stores, pharmacy, auto services) is the same cohort that survived the prior e-commerce disruption wave, making them the most defensible retail real estate
AI offers genuine cost-side tailwinds: automated underwriting, lease analytics, deal sourcing efficiency, and tenant credit monitoring — all margin-enhancing without threatening the core revenue model
No hyperscaler capture risk; Amazon, Google, and Microsoft have zero strategic interest in replicating triple-net lease ownership
18.7% revenue CAGR over 3 years is acquisition-driven and reflects a functioning capital recycling model, not a model being disrupted
Insider buying ($1M+ from CEO, $357K from executive chairman, director purchases) signals management conviction with no evidence of awareness of an existential technology threat

Red flags

Second-order risk: if AI-driven productivity permanently reduces physical retail foot traffic broadly, even necessity tenants could see softness in lease renewal rates — a slow bleed, not a disruption event
Fact base lacks FFO/AFFO data and occupancy rates, making it impossible to verify whether any early-stage rent pressure is emerging from tenant stress
The ATM equity program ($1.75B) signals ongoing dilutive capital-raising; if AI does compress any tenant category's unit economics, Agree's cost of capital and acquisition pace could slow
Thin coverage in fact base: no earnings call transcript, no forward guidance on tenant mix evolution — cannot assess whether management is actively monitoring AI's effect on their tenant base health

Valuation Referee (Damodaran-style) — 🟡 watch · 55/100 · medium confidence

ADC-PA represents the preferred stock (depositary shares) of Agree Realty Corporation, a net-lease retail REIT. The fact base's valuation block correctly flags that a standard FCF-based DCF is inappropriate for REITs — the relevant metrics are P/FFO, AFFO yield, cap rates, and dividend coverage — but as Damodaran-style referee, I can still engage by: (1) reverse-engineering what the preferred stock price implies about coverage and risk, and (2) evaluating the underlying REIT's fundamentals to assess whether the preferred dividend is safe. The security is ADC-PA: depositary shares representing 1/1000th of a share of 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred. At $17.20/share, the annual dividend is approximately 4.25% × $25 liquidation preference × 0.001 = $0.10625/depositary share, or ~$106.25 annualized per full preferred share. The depositary share price of $17.20 vs. notional value of $25 (1/1000th = $0.025 per depositary share face value) implies these are trading at a meaningful discount to par. The yield on the preferred at $17.20 is approximately: 4.25% × 25 / 1000 = $0.10625 per depositary share annually. Yield = $0.10625 / $17.20 ≈ 0.618%, which seems far too low. Re-examining: if each depositary share represents 1/1000th of a preferred share with $25 par, then notional par per depositary share = $0.025, which makes the $17.20 price implausible unless stated differently. More likely: these trade closer to $25/depositary share in normal markets — the $17.20 figure combined with a market cap of ~$9.2B for the common seems inconsistent. The fact base shows 52-week range of $16.80–$18.44 and price at $17.20, suggesting this preferred is trading at a ~31% discount to $25 par, which would imply a current yield of approximately 4.25% × $25 / $17.20 ≈ 6.18%. At this yield, the question is whether the REIT's operations can sustain the preferred dividend. The underlying REIT shows: revenue of $718M (FY2025), operating income $340M, net income $204M, operating cash flow $504M. The preferred coupon on a full share basis is $25 × 4.25% = $1.0625. Total preferred shares outstanding = unknown from filings but manageable relative to $504M OCF. Key concern: FCF is negative at -$370M because capex ($874M) massively exceeds OCF ($504M), reflecting aggressive acquisition-driven growth typical of net-lease REITs. This means the REIT is dependent on equity/debt issuance to fund growth — confirmed by the $1.75B ATM program filed April 2026. REIT-specific preferred risk: preferred dividends are senior to common but subordinate to debt. With $1.69B long-term debt (likely understated — the balance sheet shows $3.53B total liabilities vs $9.8B assets), coverage of preferred from operating cash flow appears strong. Revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years shows a genuinely growing business. The 4.3% increase in monthly distributions (June 2026) and multiple insider purchases (CEO $1M, Executive Chairman $357K, director $20K shares) provide qualitative confidence. However, the implied expectations analysis for the preferred: at 6.18% yield (if price=$17.20 on $25 par), the market is pricing in modest credit risk or interest-rate duration risk rather than fundamental impairment. This is reasonable given the balance sheet (D/E only 0.27, though this may understate true leverage). The key valuation tension: the preferred at ~31% below par suggests either (a) interest rate-driven price decline since issuance (likely, as 4.25% fixed rate is low in a higher-rate environment) or (b) credit concern (less likely given financials). This is primarily a rate/duration story, not a credit story. From a Damodaran perspective, the 'intrinsic value' of a fixed-coupon preferred = PV of coupons + PV of par at call/maturity, discounted at appropriate cost of preferred capital. If the current cost of preferred capital for a BB+/BBB- REIT is ~6-7%, then a 4.25% coupon perpetual preferred should trade below par — consistent with $17.20 on $25 par. No margin of safety is obvious here unless the REIT gets called or rates fall materially. Missing critical data: AFFO per share, FFO metrics, exact preferred share count outstanding, call date/schedule for the preferred, and any credit rating data.

Key points

The preferred security trades at ~31% discount to $25 par, implying ~6.2% current yield — primarily a rate/duration discount, not a credit impairment signal
Underlying REIT shows $504M operating cash flow (FY2025), $718M revenue with 18.7% 3-year CAGR, and low reported D/E of 0.27 — preferred dividend coverage appears strong
Negative FCF (-$370M) reflects $874M capex for acquisitions, not operating weakness; net-lease REITs routinely fund growth via ATM equity issuance (new $1.75B program filed Apr 2026)
Multiple insider purchases (CEO $1M, Executive Chair $357K, director $20K shares May-Jun 2026) in the common stock signal management conviction — indirectly supportive of preferred security
4.3% dividend increase on common (June 2026) and 18.7% revenue CAGR demonstrate growing cash generation capacity to cover preferred obligations
At 6.2% yield, the preferred is priced as a rate/duration instrument; intrinsic value depends on discount rate assumption — if ADC's cost of preferred capital is 5.5-6%, security is near fair value; if 6.5%+, still cheap
FFO/AFFO data missing from fact base — the single most important metric for REIT preferred coverage analysis is absent

Red flags

No FFO or AFFO data provided — cannot properly assess REIT-specific cash generation and preferred coverage ratio without these metrics
Long-term debt figure of $1.69B appears to be for FY2021, not FY2025 — likely understates current leverage significantly; actual total debt closer to what can be inferred from $3.53B total liabilities minus $6.27B equity gap
Fixed 4.25% coupon on preferred is inherently duration-sensitive; in a sustained higher-rate environment, intrinsic value of this perpetual preferred remains below par with no natural catalyst for price recovery unless called
$1.75B ATM equity program represents potential dilution risk to common but not direct harm to preferred — however, heavy equity issuance to fund acquisitions whose ROIC vs. WACC is unverifiable is a concern
No call schedule or maturity date provided for the preferred — without this, cannot model the PV of par recovery, making valuation imprecise
The -$370M free cash flow and heavy reliance on capital markets for growth funding means any disruption to equity/debt issuance could stress the capital allocation model, though preferred dividends would still be senior

Warren Buffett — 🟡 watch · 52/100 · medium confidence

Agree Realty (ADC) is a net-lease REIT — a business I can understand and appreciate at a basic level. Net-lease REITs own single-tenant retail properties with long-term leases where tenants pay most operating expenses. The model is simple, predictable, and somewhat analogous to owning a toll road: collect rent, raise it modestly over time, fund growth through equity/debt issuance. The business is intelligible and has a long operating history.

However, net-lease REITs fall awkwardly outside my ideal circle of competence for several reasons. First, the 'moat' here is structural rather than competitive — ADC's tenants (Walmart, Dollar General, Home Depot, etc.) have the moats; ADC merely owns the real estate they occupy. If tenants can renegotiate, vacate, or if interest rates rise substantially, cap rate compression reverses. Second, the business model is inherently capital-intensive and perpetually dependent on external capital markets to grow — capex of $874M versus operating cash flow of $504M produces negative FCF of -$370M. This is not a business that generates surplus owner earnings; it must continuously raise equity (the $1.75B ATM program filed April 2026) and issue debt to fund acquisitions. I generally dislike businesses that must keep returning to the capital markets to sustain their model.

On returns: ROE of 3.3% and ROIC of 3.4% are far below my 15%+ threshold. While REITs report artificially depressed returns due to depreciation accounting, even FFO-adjusted returns on total capital are modest for a business with $9.8B in assets. The 18.7% revenue CAGR over 3 years is driven largely by acquisitive growth funded by share issuance — not organic compounding.

Valuation is unclear without FFO/AFFO data (the DCF is appropriately flagged inapplicable). The P/B of 1.47x and P/S of 12.8x provide limited insight. The fact that the stock sits at the 52-week high (at $17.20) suggests the market is not pricing in a margin of safety on any conventional metric.

On the positive side: management alignment is real and notable — CEO Joey Agree purchased $1M in shares, Executive Chairman Richard Agree bought $357K, and a director purchased 20,000 shares in May-June 2026, all open-market. Dividend was raised 4.3% in June 2026 with monthly payouts. Debt-to-equity is 0.27x which appears conservative, though total liabilities of $3.5B against $9.8B assets is acceptable leverage for a REIT. Revenue CAGR of ~19% over 3 years is solid. The insider buying pattern is genuinely encouraging as a signal of management conviction.

Missing data I'd want: FFO/AFFO per share and growth rate, occupancy rate, weighted average lease expiry, tenant credit quality breakdown, cost of equity capital versus cap rates on acquisitions. Without AFFO metrics I cannot properly assess the dividend payout ratio or true earnings power.

Net assessment: ADC is a decent, simple-to-understand net-lease REIT with honest management and decent insider alignment. But it does not exhibit the durable competitive moat, high reinvestment returns, or surplus owner earnings that make me want to concentrate capital. It is better thought of as a regulated-utility-like income stream, not a compounding machine. At or near 52-week highs with no margin of safety visible, I'd characterize this as a 'watch' pending better price or FFO valuation data.

Key points

Simple, intelligible net-lease business model with long operating history — within basic circle of competence
Strong insider buying: CEO ($1M), Executive Chairman ($357K), and director (20,000 shares) all purchased open-market in May-June 2026
Dividend raised 4.3% in June 2026; monthly payout structure attractive for income investors
Revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years demonstrates consistent growth (albeit largely acquisition-driven)
Conservative stated leverage: debt-to-equity of 0.27x, long-term debt of $1.69B against $6.27B equity
ROE/ROIC of ~3.3-3.4% far below my 15%+ threshold — though REIT accounting distorts these figures downward
Operating cash flow of $504M solid, but capex of $874M produces negative FCF of -$370M; growth is acquisition-dependent

Red flags

Chronically negative free cash flow (-$370M); business cannot self-fund and perpetually taps equity markets — $1.75B ATM program just renewed April 2026
No identifiable competitive moat owned by ADC itself — the moat belongs to tenants (Walmart, Dollar General, etc.), not the landlord
Capital-intensive model: every dollar of growth requires external capital (equity dilution + debt), not retained earnings reinvestment
ROE of 3.3% and ROIC of 3.4% well below my minimum threshold regardless of accounting adjustments
Stock at 52-week high ($17.20) with no visible margin of safety; P/S of 12.8x elevated; no FFO/AFFO data provided to assess true valuation
Missing critical REIT metrics: FFO, AFFO, occupancy rate, weighted average lease term, tenant credit breakdown — cannot confirm earnings quality
Revenue growth driven by acquisitions, not organic compounding — dependent on favorable acquisition spreads vs. cost of capital

Charlie Munger — 🟡 watch · 52/100 · medium confidence

Agree Realty (ADC) is a net-lease retail REIT — a business model I can understand in a paragraph: buy single-tenant retail properties leased to creditworthy operators on long triple-net leases, collect rent, grow by acquisition. The unit economics are readable and the model is not a black box. However, judged against my quality criteria, this is a fair-to-good business rather than a great one, and the price is not obviously cheap. ROIC of 3.38% and ROE of 3.26% are far below my 15%+ threshold — these are accounting returns depressed by REIT depreciation, but even adjusting for that, the capital-light compounding engine I prize simply does not exist here; REITs are structurally obligated to distribute income rather than reinvest at high incremental returns, so the compounding-machine criterion fails by design. The 'moat' is real but shallow: ADC focuses on necessity-based, investment-grade tenants (grocery-anchored, convenience, discount), which provides cash flow durability and recession resistance, but there is no pricing power, no network effect, no switching cost — just location and tenant quality. Revenue CAGR of ~18.7% over 3 years is impressive but driven almost entirely by external acquisition-funded growth, not organic compounding of a franchise. Capex of $875M against operating cash flow of $504M confirms this is a capital-consumptive model dependent on continuous equity and debt issuance — the large ATM equity program ($1.75B authorized in April 2026) is a structural feature, not a bug, of the REIT model, but it means per-share intrinsic value growth is modest. Negative free cash flow (-$370M) is expected for a growing REIT but means the FCF yield lens does not apply; on P/B of 1.47x and P/E of 45x the stock is not cheap. The genuine positives: insider buying is extensive and credible (CEO $1M, Executive Chairman $357K, director $20K open market — all in May-June 2026), dividend raised 4.3%, debt-to-equity is conservative at 0.27x, long-term debt only $1.69B against $9.8B assets, and the business survived multiple rate cycles. Management appears owner-oriented and candid. The 'inversion' test: how does this go to zero? A prolonged tenant-default wave (retail apocalypse accelerating) or a sustained high-rate environment compressing cap rate spreads are the real risks — neither is zero-probability. On balance: a decent, understandable, conservatively financed income vehicle with honest management, but not the high-ROIC compounding machine my framework rewards most. At current prices it is a watch, not a pass.

Key points

Net-lease retail REIT is an understandable, simple business model — sits within circle of competence
Conservative balance sheet: debt-to-equity 0.27x, long-term debt $1.69B vs $9.8B total assets
Revenue CAGR ~18.7% over 3 years driven by acquisitions, not organic compounding
Extensive, credible insider buying: CEO ($1M), Executive Chairman ($357K), director (20,000 shares open market) in May-June 2026
Monthly dividend raised 4.3% in June 2026 — demonstrates cash flow confidence
Tenant focus on necessity-based, investment-grade retailers (grocery, convenience, discount) provides durability

Red flags

ROIC 3.38% and ROE 3.26% — far below my 15%+ quality threshold; structurally limited by REIT model
No high-ROIC reinvestment engine: REIT must distribute income, cannot compound retained earnings at high rates
Negative FCF (-$370M) driven by $875M capex — growth entirely dependent on continuous equity/debt issuance
Large ATM equity program ($1.75B) causes chronic dilution, limiting per-share intrinsic value growth
P/E of 45x on GAAP earnings and P/B of 1.47x — not a cheap entry for a low-ROIC business
Moat is shallow: no pricing power, network effects, or switching costs — just location and tenant quality
Missing FFO/AFFO data in fact base — cannot precisely assess the correct REIT valuation metric

Michael Mauboussin — 🟡 watch · 52/100 · medium confidence

ADC-PA (Agree Realty's 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock) is a fixed-income hybrid instrument trading at $17.20 — essentially a preferred security with a fixed 4.25% dividend on liquidation value. The competitive-advantage and ROIC-vs-WACC framework I apply is most directly useful for evaluating the common equity; applying it to the preferred requires a different translation. For the preferred, the key question is: does ADC's franchise produce sufficient, durable cash flows to cover the preferred dividend with a margin of safety, and are the embedded expectations (essentially a credit/coverage thesis rather than a growth thesis) correct?

On the underlying business: ADC is a net-lease REIT with ~$718M revenue (18.7% 3-year CAGR), operating income of $340M (47.4% margin), and operating cash flow of $504M. ROIC of 3.38% and ROE of 3.26% appear thin in isolation, but this is typical for asset-heavy REITs where book value includes accumulated depreciation distortions — the correct metric is P/FFO and AFFO coverage, which the fact base does not provide directly. Debt-to-equity is a modest 0.27 (though long-term debt of $1.69B is flagged from 2021 — data staleness is a concern). The operating margin near 47% signals reasonable rent-collection efficiency for a net-lease platform.

For the moat analysis: net-lease REITs have narrow, stable moats rooted in (1) tenant switching costs (long-duration NNN leases with embedded escalators lock in income streams), (2) modest scale economies in property management and capital markets access, and (3) ADC's differentiated focus on investment-grade and necessity-based retail tenants (grocers, dollar stores, pharmacy, home improvement) which reduces credit risk. This is not a wide-moat business — it is replicable with capital — but for preferred-stock purposes, what matters is whether the franchise is stable enough to cover a 4.25% fixed coupon reliably. The answer is almost certainly yes given the $504M operating cash flow vs. a preferred dividend obligation that, even at full liquidation preference, is a small fraction of that.

Expectations embedded in the preferred price: at $17.20 and a $25 par value, the preferred trades at a significant discount (~31% to par), which implies a current yield well above the 4.25% coupon (approximately 6.2% current yield on market price, though the exact calculation depends on par). This discount to par is the key signal — either the market prices in interest-rate risk (duration risk for a perpetual fixed-rate instrument in a higher-rate environment), or it reflects credit/call risk concerns. The fact base does not provide preferred-specific terms (call date, liquidation preference confirmation, call price). This is a material gap.

Insider buying of the COMMON stock by CEO and chairman is a positive signal for the underlying business health but only indirectly relevant to preferred holders. The 4.3% dividend increase on the common signals financial confidence. The ATM equity program ($1.75B) is dilutive to common but actually supportive for preferred coverage ratios.

Key uncertainties: (1) Missing FFO/AFFO data — the primary valuation metric for the underlying REIT; (2) Preferred-specific terms (call date, redemption provisions) are absent; (3) Capex of $874M vs. operating cash flow of $504M implies the company is growth-investing beyond internally generated cash, requiring external capital — manageable but worth monitoring; (4) Long-term debt data is from 2021, not current. The watch stance reflects that the underlying franchise is sound enough to likely support the preferred with reasonable margin of safety, but the discount to par suggests the market has priced in rate/duration risk that a simple yield analysis must respect, and the missing data prevents a confident pass.

Key points

Operating cash flow of $504M comfortably covers a fixed preferred dividend at 4.25% coupon, suggesting solid coverage for preferred holders
ADC's net-lease model with necessity-based, investment-grade tenants provides a narrow but stable moat — tenant switching costs via long NNN leases are the primary mechanism
Revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years and 47% operating margin indicate a growing, well-run platform relative to net-lease REIT peers
Significant insider buying of common shares by CEO ($1M) and executive chairman ($357K) in May-June 2026 signals management conviction in business health
4.3% dividend increase on common shares demonstrates cash flow confidence and suggests preferred dividend is not under pressure
Price at ~$17.20 vs. estimated $25 par implies ~6.2% current yield — attractive vs. coupon if credit holds, but discount reflects rate duration risk

Red flags

Critical missing data: preferred-specific terms (call date, call price, exact par/liquidation preference) not available in fact base — cannot fully assess risk/reward
Long-term debt figure ($1.69B) is from 2021 — current leverage profile is unclear and this is a material gap for preferred credit analysis
FCF is negative (-$370M) because capex ($874M) exceeds operating cash flow ($504M) — growth-mode REIT dependent on external capital markets, creating refinancing risk
ROIC of 3.38% is below most estimates of WACC, which for a REIT is not unusual given accounting distortions, but creates ambiguity about true economic return spread
No FFO/AFFO data provided — the standard REIT coverage and payout metrics are absent, preventing proper preferred dividend coverage analysis
Preferred discount to par (~31%) is large and reflects market-level interest rate risk for a perpetual fixed-rate instrument — duration exposure is real in any rate-rising scenario
ATM equity program of $1.75B represents ongoing dilution risk to common equity, though this is supportive (not harmful) for preferred holders

Ray Dalio — 🟡 watch · 48/100 · medium confidence

ADC-PA (Agree Realty's 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock) is highly relevant to my macro/rate lens. This is a perpetual preferred security at $17.20, representing a fixed 4.25% coupon on a $25 liquidation preference — making it quintessentially a long-duration, rate-sensitive, fixed-income-like instrument. From a regime-robustness perspective, this is deeply problematic: it wins in exactly ONE macro box (falling growth + falling inflation/rates = 'deflation') and suffers in three others. In a rising-rate/inflation regime, the fixed 4.25% coupon gets crushed in real terms and the market price falls toward par-discount levels. In stagflation it is doubly punished — real yield compression plus elevated refinancing risk for the underlying REIT. The underlying business (net-lease retail REIT) has meaningful inflation pass-through via CPI-linked escalators in triple-net leases, which is a genuine positive for the common equity, but the PREFERRED holder captures none of that upside — only the fixed 4.25%. On the balance sheet side, ADC's corporate debt load appears manageable (D/E of 0.27, long-term debt ~$1.7B against $9.8B assets, P/B of 1.47), with operating cash flow of $504M suggesting reasonable coverage. However, ADC is a serial capital markets user — the April 2026 $1.75B ATM program and heavy capex ($874M in 2024) confirm continuous capital markets dependency, which is a fragile-balance-sheet red flag for an adverse credit cycle. The preferred itself is redeemable at the company's option, not the holder's, creating asymmetric call risk in a falling-rate environment while offering no floor in a rising-rate environment. Duration risk for a perpetual preferred with a 4.25% coupon is extreme — effective duration likely 15-25 years at current prices. The $17.20 price versus $25 par indicates the market has already repriced this for a sustained higher-rate regime (a 32% discount to par implies current yield ~6.2%), which provides some margin of safety vs. the theoretical par value but no protection against further rate rises. Geographic concentration (US-only retail net-lease) adds single-economy exposure with no FX diversification. The one material positive: insider buying of COMMON shares by CEO and chairman signals management confidence in the enterprise, which supports credit quality for preferred holders. The 4.3% dividend increase on the common and revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years show a growing underlying business. But for the PREFERRED specifically, these positives accrue to common equity first; preferred holders are subordinated creditors with fixed, below-market current coupon in a higher-for-longer world.

Key points

Fixed 4.25% perpetual coupon creates extreme duration risk (~20yr effective duration) — the preferred's primary vulnerability in a sustained higher-rate or inflationary regime
Current market price of $17.20 vs $25 par implies ~6.2% current yield, suggesting market has already repriced for higher rates; this discount provides some downside cushion but not full protection against further rate normalization
Underlying REIT has reasonable balance sheet (D/E 0.27, $504M operating cash flow) supporting preferred dividend coverage, with 18.7% 3yr revenue CAGR and occupancy-stable net-lease model
Triple-net lease structure with CPI escalators protects common equity FFO in inflation, but preferred holders receive none of this inflation upside — only the fixed nominal coupon
Coordinated insider buying of common shares ($1M+ CEO, chairman, director) signals enterprise confidence and supports credit quality for preferred claim
ATM program of $1.75B signals continuous capital markets dependency — in a credit contraction, equity issuance becomes expensive/impossible, stressing the preferred coverage ratio

Red flags

Single-regime instrument — 4.25% perpetual preferred ONLY wins in falling-rate/falling-inflation regime; underperforms or loses real value in all other macro boxes
Issuer-callable but NOT holder-redeemable — asymmetric optionality entirely favors the issuer (calls when rates fall), leaving preferred holders holding duration risk when rates rise
Negative GAAP FCF (-$370M) due to heavy acquisition capex creates optics risk; REIT FFO metric more appropriate but not provided in fact base — cannot confirm preferred coverage ratio with precision
Serial capital markets user (ATM equity, forward equity, senior unsecured notes) — balance sheet resilience through a credit freeze is unproven and concerning
No inflation pass-through to preferred holder — fixed nominal payments erode in real terms in any inflationary scenario
US-only exposure with no geographic diversification; single-sector (retail net-lease) concentration amplifies macro shock correlation to consumer/retail cycle

Seth Klarman — 🟡 watch · 48/100 · medium confidence

ADC-PA is a preferred stock (depositary shares representing 1/1000th of a share of 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock) in a retail REIT. From a Klarman perspective, this is a fixed-income-like instrument where margin of safety analysis centers on: (1) asset coverage for the preferred in liquidation, (2) dividend coverage from operating cash flows, and (3) whether the current price offers a genuine discount to par/call value. The instrument trades at $17.20, which likely reflects a small discount to the $25.00 par/liquidation preference typical for preferred depositary shares (each representing 1/1000th of a share, implying underlying preferred par of ~$25,000 per share, so depositary unit par is $25). At $17.20 vs. ~$25 par, there IS a nominal 31% discount to par, which superficially suggests margin of safety. However, the 4.25% coupon is fixed and low in a higher-for-longer rate environment — this explains the discount almost entirely; it is not a distressed mispricing but a rational rate-driven markdown. The underlying REIT balance sheet shows: total assets $9.8B, total liabilities $3.5B, stockholders' equity $6.27B — implying book equity coverage is substantial and preferred holders appear well-covered in liquidation given low leverage (D/E of 0.27). Operating cash flow of $504M covers the preferred dividend adequately (4.25% on $25 par per depositary unit × shares outstanding is a modest obligation). Revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years and 47% operating margin signal a healthy REIT platform. Insider buying at the common level (CEO $1M, Chairman $357K) suggests management views equity as undervalued. The 4.3% dividend increase on common shares is positive for coverage. Key concerns: (1) The discount to par is almost entirely explained by interest rate duration risk, not fundamental distress — there is no 'orphaned security' dynamic here, making it a rate bet rather than a classic Klarman value situation. (2) The coupon at 4.25% is unattractive in absolute terms for a fixed return instrument. (3) There is no near-term catalyst to close the gap to par — preferred shares only converge to par at call/redemption, which management has no incentive to execute given the below-market coupon from issuer's perspective. (4) FCF is negative ($-370M) due to large capex ($874M), though this is typical for a growing REIT and OCF is strongly positive. (5) Key REIT metrics (FFO, AFFO, occupancy, lease duration, tenant credit quality) are absent from the fact base, making precise asset-coverage stress-testing impossible. This sits in 'watch' territory — there is some asset backing and the discount to par is real, but the mispricing is rate-driven with no obvious catalyst, the coupon is low, and the analysis is constrained by missing REIT-specific data.

Key points

Depositary units trade at ~$17.20 vs. implied ~$25 par, representing a ~31% discount to liquidation preference — provides nominal margin of safety
Balance sheet is conservatively leveraged: D/E of 0.27, total assets $9.8B vs. liabilities $3.5B; preferred holders appear well-covered in a liquidation scenario
Operating cash flow of $504M is robust and covers preferred dividend obligations comfortably
Revenue growing at 18.7% CAGR over 3 years; operating margin of 47% indicates healthy underlying REIT operations
Significant insider buying at common level (CEO, Chairman, Director) in May-June 2026 suggests management conviction in the platform
4.3% dividend increase on common stock reinforces financial health and cash flow strength

Red flags

Discount to par is almost entirely explained by interest rate duration risk on a 4.25% fixed coupon — this is a rate bet, not a classic value mispricing with an identifiable catalyst
No near-term catalyst to close the gap to par: issuer has no economic incentive to call preferred given below-market coupon rate
Critical REIT-specific metrics absent (FFO, AFFO, occupancy rate, WALT, tenant credit quality, cap rate) — cannot perform rigorous asset-coverage stress test
Negative reported FCF (-$370M) due to $874M capex; while OCF is positive and normal for growing REITs, this complicates downside cash flow analysis
ATM equity program of $1.75B signals ongoing dilution at common level — while beneficial for preferred coverage, it underscores capital-hungry growth model
Price is at 52-week high ($17.20), suggesting no forced-selling or technical dislocation driving the discount — mispricing is structural, not opportunistic

Forensic Short-Seller (Chanos/Einhorn-style) — 🟡 watch · 48/100 · medium confidence

ADC-PA (Agree Realty preferred depositary shares) sits at the intersection of a genuinely interesting forensic case and significant data limitations. The core earnings-vs-cash test raises real flags: 2025 net income was $204M while operating cash flow was $504M — on the surface favorable for a REIT, but capex was $874M (2024 period), producing deeply negative FCF of -$370M against positive GAAP earnings. This is the classic 'earnings positive, FCF deeply negative, survival contingent on continuous capital market access' structure Chanos targets. The April 2026 8-K confirms this dependency: a new $1.75B ATM equity program was immediately stood up, replacing the October 2024 program. This is a business that cannot self-fund its acquisition pipeline — it is a permanent capital-raising machine. The preferred stock (ADC-PA, 4.25% Series A cumulative redeemable) is technically the instrument being assessed; at $17.20, this is a preferred trading near or at par, and its risk profile is subordinated to the common equity's financing dependency. Key forensic concerns: (1) Continuous equity dilution via ATM — the common equity base is perpetually diluted to fund growth, which is normal for external-growth REITs but creates a structural ceiling on intrinsic value per share; (2) The $874M capex vs $504M operating cash flow gap means the company burns through equity issuance roughly $370M+ annually; (3) Long-term debt of only $1.69B (2021 period — data staleness is itself a red flag; actual 2025 debt load likely materially higher given acquisition pace); (4) P/B of 1.47x and ROE of only 3.26% suggest mediocre capital efficiency masked by the REIT structure. However, several forensic red flags are absent or attenuated: insider buying (not selling) — CEO bought $1M, executive chairman bought $357K — this is the opposite of the typical short setup; dividend growing 4.3% signals management confidence in cash coverage; debt-to-equity of 0.27x appears conservative though the long-term debt figure may be stale. The kill question for a short: if capital markets close or interest rates spike materially, ADC's acquisition-driven growth model stalls, the ATM becomes ineffective, and the dividend coverage on the preferred gets tested against a shrinking acquisition pipeline. The preferred itself at 4.25% coupon in a higher-rate environment is also intrinsically impaired on a yield-to-par basis. What would disprove the bear case: if FFO/AFFO data (missing from fact base) shows strong and growing coverage of both common and preferred dividends from operating income alone, the financing dependency is less existential. The absence of FFO data, earnings call transcripts, occupancy rates, and lease rollover schedules is the primary confidence limiter here.

Key points

FCF deeply negative (-$370M) while net income positive ($204M) — classic earnings-cash divergence; survival requires continuous ATM equity issuance
New $1.75B ATM program filed April 2026 immediately after exhausting prior program — financing dependence is structural, not episodic
Long-term debt data from 2021 (stale); actual 2025 debt load is likely materially understated in the fact base — a genuine information gap
Preferred stock (4.25% coupon) is intrinsically below-par on a yield basis in current rate environment — trading risk if rates stay elevated
ROE of 3.26% and ROIC of 3.38% are below any reasonable cost of capital, implying value-destructive acquisition treadmill
Capex ($874M, 2024) dwarfs operating cash flow ($504M, 2025) — growth is entirely acquisition-financed, not organically generated

Red flags

Persistent negative FCF (-$370M) with positive GAAP net income — the accrual gap is large and structural for this REIT model
Continuous equity dilution: ATM programs are the lifeblood of the business model; shares outstanding will keep growing
Stale long-term debt figure (2021) in fact base — cannot assess current debt wall, covenant status, or maturity schedule without updated data
4.25% preferred coupon is below prevailing risk-free rates — preferred trades at a structural discount to par on economic basis
Missing FFO/AFFO data: without these standard REIT metrics, dividend coverage and true earnings power cannot be assessed — a material blind spot
P/E of 45x on GAAP earnings that are themselves questionable given REIT depreciation conventions — headline multiple is misleading without FFO context

Howard Marks — 🔴 avoid · 32/100 · medium confidence

ADC-PA (the 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred depositary shares) is assessed through the Marks risk lens: price relative to value, what is priced in, margin of safety, and cycle positioning. The preferred is trading at $17.20, near its 52-week high of $18.44, and appears to be at or near par/liquidation value territory for a preferred instrument. At 4.25% coupon on a $25 par preferred, the current price implies a yield of roughly 6.2% ($1.0625 annual dividend / $17.20), which is modest for a retail REIT preferred in this rate environment. The critical Howard Marks question: what is priced in, and where is the asymmetry? On the downside risk side: the parent REIT (ADC) carries negative free cash flow (-$370M) driven by heavy capex ($874.5M), though this is structurally normal for a growth-oriented net-lease REIT deploying capital. Operating cash flow of $504M comfortably covers preferred dividends, which is a genuine cushion. Total liabilities of $3.53B against total assets of $9.8B gives reasonable headline coverage (debt-to-equity 0.27x is conservative). Long-term debt is only $1.69B per the filing, suggesting a manageable capital structure. These are genuine positives. However, the Marks framework demands I score the bargain, not the quality. At $17.20 against $25 par, there IS a discount to liquidation value — roughly 31% below par — which is meaningful for a preferred. This creates some intrinsic floor value argument. But this is a preferred security trading in a well-functioning market; there is no distress, no forced selling, no revulsion. The 4.25% coupon was set in a near-zero rate era, making it structurally unattractive relative to current yields on comparable instruments. The parent common has been the subject of multiple insider purchases (CEO $1M, chairman $357K) — a bullish signal for equity, but preferred holders do not benefit from upside. The ATM equity program ($1.75B authorized) signals ongoing dilution on the common side, which is neutral-to-slightly-negative for preferred coverage as the REIT continuously issues equity to fund acquisitions. The dividend was raised 4.3% on the common in June 2026 — preferred coupon is fixed, so common dividend growth creates no value for preferred holders while confirming management prioritizes equity returns. Sentiment analysis: this name appears on 'best monthly dividend stocks' and 'undervalued dividend stocks' lists — it is NOT a hated, out-of-favor name. It is a consensus-beloved income instrument. That is precisely the condition Marks warns against. The crowd already owns this. The 52-week price range is extremely tight ($16.80–$18.44), suggesting a stable, well-bid security with no fear premium — the opposite of a contrarian opportunity. There is no margin of safety beyond the par discount, and at a 4.25% coupon, real returns after inflation are questionable. The DCF is appropriately flagged as not applicable. Bottom line: reasonable quality, wrong price for a Marks-style risk/reward. Too little fear priced in, too little yield for the rate environment, no variant thesis, no forced selling. The 31% discount to par is the only redeeming feature but is insufficient given the low coupon and absence of distress dynamics.

Key points

4.25% fixed coupon preferred priced at $17.20 implies ~6.2% current yield — modest for a retail REIT preferred in today's rate environment
Trades at ~31% discount to $25 par, which provides some intrinsic floor/margin of safety
Parent ADC has operating cash flow of $504M vs. total liabilities of $3.53B — preferred dividend coverage appears adequate
Debt-to-equity of 0.27x is conservative for a REIT; capital structure is not fragile
Insider buying on the common (CEO $1M, chairman $357K) signals conviction but benefits equity holders, not preferred holders

Red flags

Consensus-loved name — featured on 'best dividend' lists, no revulsion or forced selling present; Marks explicitly warns against buying at peak popularity
4.25% coupon is a legacy near-zero-rate instrument; in the current rate environment this is structurally below-market and the security is mis-priced for yield-seekers who price-in safety
$1.75B ATM equity program authorized (April 2026) signals ongoing equity issuance dilution — neutral for preferred but signals management is growing aggressively, increasing execution risk
No distress dynamics: 52-week range is extremely tight ($16.80–$18.44), no panic, no credit widening, no asymmetric upside from a fear-to-calm normalization
Fixed coupon means preferred holders receive zero benefit from the 4.3% common dividend increase or any future growth — all upside captured by equity; preferred is pure credit risk at an unattractive yield
Fact base is thin on AFFO, FFO, and cap rate data — impossible to stress-test preferred coverage under a real estate downturn scenario

Benjamin Graham — 🔴 avoid · 28/100 · medium confidence

Agree Realty Corporation's preferred shares (ADC-PA) represent a 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock. While the preferred instrument itself offers fixed income characteristics (cumulative dividends, redemption feature), assessing it through a Graham value lens reveals serious concerns. The common equity valuation is stretched: P/E of 45x is three times Graham's defensive ceiling of 15x, and the P/B of 1.47x yields a P/E × P/B product of ~66, vastly exceeding Graham's 22.5 threshold. Free cash flow is deeply negative (-$370M) because capital expenditures ($874M) dwarf operating cash flow ($504M), meaning the company is in heavy acquisition mode funded by perpetual equity issuance (the $1.75B ATM program is a structural feature). Balance sheet quality from a Graham perspective is weak for the preferred holder's support cushion: only $16M cash against a market cap of $9.2B, debt-to-equity of 0.27 using stated equity but long-term debt of $1.69B (note: this figure appears to be from a 2021 period per the data, raising data quality concerns), and total liabilities of $3.53B versus $6.27B stockholders' equity. The current ratio is unavailable, a critical gap for Graham analysis. The REIT structure means current assets/liabilities analysis is not meaningful in the traditional sense — this is a capital-intensive real estate enterprise continuously diluting shareholders via ATM offerings. The 4.25% preferred coupon is well below current interest rates, making this preferred structurally unattractive on a fixed-income basis and subject to significant interest rate risk. Revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years reflects acquisition-driven growth, not organic earnings stability. ROE of 3.26% and ROIC of 3.38% are thin. FFO/AFFO data — the appropriate REIT earnings metric — is absent from the fact base. Insider buying of common shares is modestly positive but pertains to common equity, not the preferred. The DCF is correctly flagged as not applicable. In summary: the preferred coupon is inadequate in the current rate environment, the underlying common equity is priced well above Graham's intrinsic value parameters, balance sheet scrutiny is limited by missing data, and the business model depends on perpetual external capital rather than demonstrated retained earnings — antithetical to Graham's margin-of-safety principle.

Key points

4.25% preferred coupon is structurally below current high-grade bond yields, offering no margin of safety on a fixed-income basis
Common equity P/E of 45x is 3x Graham's defensive maximum of 15x; P/E × P/B of ~66 far exceeds the 22.5 threshold
Negative free cash flow of -$370M reflects $874M capex funded by continuous ATM equity dilution, not self-funding operations
Revenue CAGR of 18.7% is acquisition-driven, not organic — Graham rewards demonstrated earnings stability, not growth via capital deployment
Multiple insider open-market purchases by CEO and Chairman in May-June 2026 provide modest positive signal for common equity holders
Monthly dividend payments with a 4.3% increase signal ongoing cash distributions, though FFO payout ratios are unavailable for verification

Red flags

P/E of 45x is three times Graham's ceiling; no margin of safety on earnings
Current ratio is unavailable — a critical gap for Graham's balance sheet tests
Long-term debt figure in the fact base appears stale (labeled 2021-12-31), reducing confidence in debt analysis
Negative FCF (-$370M) and reliance on perpetual ATM equity issuance ($1.75B program) violates balance-sheet self-sufficiency principles
4.25% preferred coupon provides inadequate income relative to prevailing interest rates, creating interest rate duration risk
FFO/AFFO data entirely absent — the only valid earnings metric for REIT valuation — making proper intrinsic value estimation impossible

Walter Schloss — 🔴 avoid · 28/100 · medium confidence

Agree Realty's preferred shares (ADC-PA) represent 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock depositary shares. Assessed through a Schloss deep-value lens, this security fails on virtually every hard-asset cheapness criterion I care about. Price-to-book is 1.47x — not terrible for a REIT, but the common equity book value of $6.27B is partly supported by real estate carried at historical cost less depreciation, plus intangible lease assets that are not tangible book in the Schloss sense. More critically, the ADC-PA preferred is trading at or near its 52-week HIGH ($17.20 = 52w high per the fact base), which is the precise opposite of a beaten-down bargain. I do not buy things at their highs. The preferred pays a fixed 4.25% coupon on a $25 liquidation preference, implying current yield of roughly 6.2% at $17.20 — modestly attractive as income, but offering zero margin of safety on a hard-asset basis since the security is essentially a fixed-income instrument. REIT balance sheets carry significant debt: total liabilities of $3.53B against $9.8B total assets, and long-term debt of $1.69B (though this figure appears to be from 2021, suggesting data staleness). The operating cash flow of $504M against capex of $875M confirms heavy external capital dependence — the company must continuously issue equity (new $1.75B ATM program just launched April 2026) and debt to fund acquisitions, which dilutes common holders and keeps leverage elevated. Free cash flow is deeply negative (-$370M). On the positive side: insider buying is conspicuous and meaningful (CEO $1M, chairman $357K, director 20K shares — all open-market in May-June 2026), and the 4.3% dividend increase signals financial health. The business is simple to understand — net-lease retail REIT with long-term leases to credit tenants. However, a preferred share at its 52-week high with a below-market fixed coupon, no discount to par, no tangible asset cushion specific to preferred holders, and issued by a leverage-dependent external-capital-reliant REIT is simply not a Schloss situation. I want distress discounts and asset protection, not a bond proxy at face value.

Key points

Price at 52-week HIGH ($17.20) — Schloss only buys beaten-down, depressed securities, not those at their peaks
Price-to-book of 1.47x on common equity; preferred has no discount to par/liquidation value ($25 face), trading below par implies some yield pickup but no asset margin of safety
Strong insider buying signal: CEO, chairman, and director all made open-market purchases May-June 2026 totaling well over $1M — one genuine positive
4.25% fixed coupon preferred in a ~4-5% rate environment; current yield ~6.2% at $17.20 reflects modest but not compelling spread
Business is simple and understandable: net-lease retail REIT with long-term NNN leases — fits Schloss simplicity criterion
Dividend raised 4.3% on common (June 2026) signals financial health of the underlying entity
Revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years shows growth, but this is funded by external capital — $1.75B new ATM equity program, not organic cash generation

Red flags

Security trading at its 52-week high — antithetical to Schloss bargain-hunting methodology
Deeply negative free cash flow (-$370M, -52% FCF margin) — REIT must constantly access capital markets to fund acquisitions
New $1.75B ATM equity program (April 2026) signals ongoing dilution of common equity holders
Negative FCF means preferred dividends are paid from debt/equity issuance proceeds, not organic cash generation — structural dependency
Total liabilities $3.53B; capex ($875M) far exceeds operating cash flow ($504M), confirming leverage-dependent growth model
Long-term debt figure in fact base appears to be from 2021 ($1.69B) — current debt load likely substantially higher given acquisition pace; data gap is concerning
Preferred is a fixed-income surrogate with no upside participation — Schloss wanted equity-like recovery potential from cheap assets, not capped yield instruments

Peter Lynch — 🔴 avoid · 22/100 · medium confidence

Agree Realty Corp (ADC) is a net-lease REIT — a classic slow grower / stalwart income vehicle. I can explain the business in one sentence: ADC owns single-tenant retail properties (gas stations, dollar stores, drug stores, grocery) under long-term net leases and pays monthly dividends. That's understandable. But applying my PEG framework here produces a damning number. The reported PEG is 2.41, meaning the market is pricing in roughly 2.4x the growth rate in the P/E — exactly the kind of overpayment I want to avoid. The P/E of ~45x is absurdly high for a slow-growing REIT stalwart; even if I substitute FFO-based earnings (which would be more generous than GAAP net income), this is not a 45x growth story. Revenue CAGR over 3 years is 18.7%, but that is a REIT growing via external acquisitions funded by equity issuance — not the organic, repeatable unit-economics rollout I prize in a fast grower. The April 2026 ATM equity program for up to $1.75B tells me growth is acquisition-driven and equity-dilutive, not internally funded. Free cash flow is deeply negative (-$370M) because of capex, so there is no internal funding of growth. ROE of 3.3% and ROIC of 3.4% are anemic — a 'fast grower' compound machine this is not. Insider buying by the CEO ($1M) and executive chairman ($357K) is a genuine Lynch-positive signal — I always liked when management put their own money in — but it is not enough to overcome the structural valuation problem. Debt-to-equity of 0.27 looks modest but the balance sheet carries preferred stock obligations (Series A, 4.25% cumulative) plus $1.7B long-term debt with only $16M cash. The 4.25% preferred depositary shares (ADC-PA) being evaluated here trade at $17.20 against a par/liquidation value context and represent a fixed-income-like instrument, not an equity growth vehicle at all — making my PEG and EPS-growth framework even less applicable. This is an income instrument dressed as equity. I can find no believable earnings-growth story that justifies current multiples under my framework.

Key points

Business is understandable: net-lease REIT with convenience/necessity retail tenants — passes the 'explain it in two sentences' test
PEG of 2.41 far exceeds my 1.0 ceiling; even generous adjustments do not fix this
Revenue CAGR of 18.7% is acquisition-driven (equity-funded via ATM programs), not organic rollout growth I can underwrite
Insider buying by CEO (~$1M) and executive chairman (~$357K) in May-June 2026 is a legitimate Lynch-positive signal
Monthly dividend raised 4.3% in June 2026 — company has cash-flow discipline on distributions
Low beta (0.48) and net-lease model confirm stalwart/slow-grower category, not fast grower

Red flags

PEG of 2.41 — paying 2.4x the growth rate is a classic overpayment trap
P/E of ~45x is wildly elevated for a slow-growing income REIT; GAAP earnings inflate the multiple vs. FFO
Negative free cash flow (-$370M) means growth is entirely externally funded — not self-financing
$1.75B ATM equity program (April 2026) is dilutive; growth via share issuance is not the Lynch rollout formula
ROE of 3.3% and ROIC of 3.4% are far too low for a compounding growth story
ADC-PA is a preferred depositary share — a fixed-income-like security — making equity growth metrics almost entirely inapplicable
Only $16M cash against $1.7B+ long-term debt; minimal cash cushion
No FFO/AFFO data in fact base, making proper REIT valuation impossible — I'm flying partially blind

Chuck Akre — abstained

ADC-PA is a preferred stock (depositary shares representing 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock) of Agree Realty Corporation — a net-lease REIT. This instrument is structurally incompatible with the Akre quality-compounder framework on multiple fronts. First, preferred equity is a fixed-income-like security with a capped 4.25% coupon and no participation in earnings growth or per-share intrinsic value compounding — the antithesis of what Akre seeks. Second, even the underlying common equity (ADC) would be a difficult fit: REITs are balance-sheet-driven, capital-intensive businesses that must distribute 90%+ of taxable income, leaving no meaningful retained earnings to reinvest at high rates of return — exactly the 'no reinvestment runway' failure mode. Reported ROE of 3.26% and ROIC of 3.38% are far below the ~20%+ threshold Akre prizes, and these returns are intrinsically limited by REIT structure. The FCF is deeply negative (-$370M) due to acquisition capex, which is the core REIT business model but signals high capital intensity. There is no compounding machine, no capital-light franchise with pricing power in the Akre sense, and no ability for per-share FCF to compound internally. The correct verdict is to abstain rather than force an incompatible framework onto a preferred security of a capital-intensive, distribution-mandated real estate entity.

Key points

ADC-PA is a 4.25% fixed-rate preferred security — a fixed-income instrument with no upside participation in business compounding
REIT structure mandates 90%+ income distribution, eliminating the reinvestment runway that is the cornerstone of the Akre framework
Underlying ADC ROE of 3.26% and ROIC of 3.38% are dramatically below the ~20%+ Akre threshold, and cannot improve structurally under REIT rules
Negative FCF of -$370M reflects capital-intensive acquisition-driven growth model, opposite of capital-light franchise economics
P/FFO and cap-rate analysis (REIT-appropriate metrics) are outside the Akre analytical toolkit

Red flags

Fixed coupon of 4.25% means zero participation in any business value creation — compounding is impossible for this security
High capital intensity: capex of $874M against operating cash flow of $504M; business consumes more cash than it generates organically
Structural leverage inherent in REIT model (total liabilities $3.5B against equity $6.3B, plus perpetual preferred obligations)
No reinvestment runway — REIT law prohibits the retained-earnings compounding engine Akre requires
Price-to-book of 1.47x on preferred units adds complexity; preferred holders face call/redemption risk without upside

Stanley Druckenmiller — abstained

ADC-PA is a preferred stock (depositary shares representing 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock) in a net-lease retail REIT. This is a fixed-income-like instrument with a fixed 4.25% coupon, no earnings acceleration thesis, no catalytic inflection, and no asymmetric payoff profile. The Druckenmiller lens requires a directional earnings/liquidity thesis with a concentrated, asymmetric risk/reward setup — none of which exists for a fixed-rate preferred instrument. The preferred has a defined coupon, likely callable, and trades around par/liquidation preference. There is no 'second derivative' of earnings growth to capture, no secular wave to ride, and the upside is capped by the fixed coupon while downside exists via rising rates or credit deterioration. The common equity (ADC) would at least offer some directional earnings thesis, but the preferred ADC-PA is purely an income instrument with bond-like characteristics. My mandate is directional macro/earnings momentum trades, not yield harvesting on preferred securities.

Key points

ADC-PA is a 4.25% fixed-rate preferred security — a fixed-income substitute, not a directional equity trade
No earnings acceleration, no EPS inflection, no catalyst-driven asymmetry possible for a fixed-coupon preferred
Upside capped at par/call price; no ability to 'ride a winner' as Druckenmiller style demands
REIT preferreds are rate-sensitive instruments — in a rate environment where real rates remain elevated, this is fighting the macro backdrop
No liquidity edge: preferred shares typically trade with lower volume than common, reducing ability to size up and exit quickly
Even the common equity (ADC) offers limited momentum signal: FCF negative, P/FFO metrics not provided, revenue CAGR of 18.7% is primarily acquisition-driven not organic earnings inflection

Red flags

Fixed 4.25% coupon in a world where alternatives yield more — no asymmetric upside
Rate sensitivity compresses preferred valuations when real rates are elevated — fighting the Fed on duration
No identifiable catalyst that would cause this preferred to dramatically outperform; total return is essentially the coupon
Negative FCF (-$370M) and heavy capex ($874M) at the REIT level suggests capital intensity that benefits common equity dilution, not preferred holders
Price trading at 52-week high ($17.20) with essentially no price range movement (52w low $16.80) confirms bond-like, range-bound behavior — no momentum to ride

Philip Fisher — abstained

Agree Realty Corporation (ADC) is a net-lease retail REIT — a real estate investment trust that owns single-tenant commercial properties leased to retailers under long-term net leases. This is a fundamentally income-oriented, capital-recycling business model with no R&D, no product pipeline, no technology or manufacturing, and no organic volume growth driven by innovation. The company grows primarily by acquiring more properties (external, capital-markets-funded growth), not by compounding internal reinvestment at high returns. This is precisely the category of no-growth-franchise, asset-accumulation business where my scuttlebutt and growth-franchise methodology simply does not apply. The negative FCF (-$370M), high capex ($874M), and P/FFO-based valuation structure confirm this is a yield/income vehicle, not a compounder. Forcing a Fisher growth lens onto a net-lease REIT would produce a meaningless and misleading verdict.

Key points

ADC is a net-lease retail REIT — a property-accumulation, income-distribution business with no R&D, no product pipeline, and no organic innovation-driven growth.
Revenue CAGR of 18.7% over 3 years reflects property acquisitions funded by equity raises (ATM program up to $1.75B), not organic volume or product expansion.
The business model explicitly requires recurring dilutive equity issuance to fund growth — the opposite of the internal compounding I seek.
No scuttlebutt dimension is applicable: there are no customers evaluating a product, no R&D converting to revenue, no sales force gaining market share.
The valuation block itself flags DCF inapplicability, confirming this is a REIT valued on P/FFO and cap rates, not growth multiples.

Red flags

Growth is entirely acquisition-driven and equity-funded — not earned organically, which is my primary disqualifying red flag.
Chronic negative FCF (-$370M) is structurally inherent to the REIT growth model but incompatible with my criterion of profits compounded internally at high returns.
ROE of 3.3% and ROIC of 3.4% are far below any threshold I would accept for a compounder — capital is being deployed at sub-cost-of-capital returns by growth-lens standards.
No R&D spend, no product pipeline, no expanding addressable market driven by innovation — the entire Fisher framework is inapplicable.

Joel Greenblatt — abstained

Agree Realty Corporation (ADC-PA) is a REIT — specifically a retail net-lease REIT — which falls squarely within my explicit abstain category. REITs are designed so that traditional EBIT and invested capital metrics are distorted and unreliable: (1) real estate assets are depreciated on GAAP but typically appreciate in value, making EBIT understated and net fixed assets misleading as a capital base denominator; (2) REITs are legally required to distribute 90%+ of taxable income, so capital structure and reinvestment dynamics differ fundamentally from operating businesses; (3) the fact base itself confirms FCF is negative (-$370M) due to acquisition capex ($874M), making free cash flow meaningless, and the valuation block explicitly flags that 'FCF-based DCF is not appropriate for Real Estate — REITs on P/FFO and cap rates.' The correct metrics for ADC are FFO/AFFO, P/FFO, cap rates, and net asset value — none of which map to my Magic Formula inputs of EBIT/Invested Capital and EBIT/EV. Attempting to apply Greenblatt ROIC (~3.3% reported ROIC from accounting equity) and earnings yield (EBIT $340M / EV that includes ~$3.5B in liabilities) would produce numbers that are artifacts of real estate accounting, not economic returns on tangible capital employed. The business may be a fine income vehicle, but it is not analyzable under my framework. I abstain.

Key points

ADC is a net-lease REIT — explicitly outside my applicable universe alongside financials and utilities
GAAP depreciation on real estate makes EBIT and net fixed assets unreliable inputs for Magic Formula ROIC
Negative FCF (-$370M) is a function of acquisition capex, not operating deterioration, but renders my FCF conversion check meaningless
The valuation module itself flags DCF/FCF analysis as not applicable for REITs
Correct REIT valuation requires FFO/AFFO, P/FFO, and cap rate analysis — outside my toolkit
Reported ROIC of 3.4% is an accounting artifact of real estate depreciation, not a true return on tangible capital

Red flags

REIT structure fundamentally distorts both Magic Formula inputs (ROIC and earnings yield)
Cannot derive reliable normalized EBIT or tangible invested capital base from these filings under my methodology
Any score I assigned would be based on meaningless inputs — intellectual dishonesty to force a verdict

Bruce Greenwald — abstained

ADC-PA (Agree Realty's 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock) is a REIT preferred security. The Greenwald EPV/asset-reproduction framework is explicitly inapplicable here for two compounding reasons: (1) As a REIT preferred, the instrument is valued on its fixed coupon yield vs. prevailing credit spreads and interest rates — not on earnings power or asset reproduction cost. There is no 'distributable earnings capitalized at WACC' calculation that is meaningful for a fixed-rate preferred strip. (2) Even for the common equity of a net-lease REIT like ADC, Greenwald methodology is ill-suited — REITs are pass-through vehicles with mandatory distributions, where operating earnings are structurally depressed by GAAP depreciation on long-lived real assets, FCF is deeply negative by construction (capex-heavy acquisition model), and the valuation reference points are P/FFO and cap rates, not EPV. The fact base itself notes the DCF is not applicable for this reason. Forcing an EPV framework onto a preferred REIT security would produce meaningless numbers. The correct council member to assess this security is a fixed-income/yield specialist or a REIT-specialist value lens using P/FFO and cap-rate analysis.

Key points

ADC-PA is a 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock — a fixed-income-like instrument priced on yield spread, not earnings power
Greenwald EPV requires normalizable operating earnings and a meaningful NOPAT/WACC ratio; preferred dividends are contractually fixed and not subject to earnings-power analysis
The underlying REIT structure (Agree Realty) has negative GAAP FCF (-$370M) by construction due to acquisition capex — making any FCF or earnings-power normalization unreliable without FFO/AFFO data
Asset reproduction value for a net-lease REIT is cap-rate-driven real estate portfolio value, not a Greenwald intangible-rebuild exercise
The valuation block correctly flags DCF as not applicable for REITs; same logic applies to EPV here

Red flags

Forcing EPV methodology on a preferred REIT security would produce analytically meaningless results — abstention is the intellectually honest answer
No FFO/AFFO data is available in the fact base, which would be the minimum required even for a modified Greenwald analysis of the common equity

Terry Smith (Fundsmith) — abstained

ADC-PA (Agree Realty Corporation preferred shares) is a REIT — a capital-intensive, externally-funded real estate vehicle that fundamentally fails the Fundsmith quality screen. REITs are structurally incompatible with my investment criteria: they are legally required to distribute ~90% of taxable income, making internal compounding impossible; they depend on perpetual external capital markets access (equity and debt) to grow, as evidenced by the April 2026 $1.75bn ATM program filing; they generate negative free cash flow by GAAP definition (FCF = -$370M, FCF margin = -52%) because growth capex dwarfs operating cash flow; ROCE of 3.4% is catastrophically below any reasonable cost of capital threshold and far beneath my 20%+ hurdle; and the asset-heavy balance sheet ($9.8bn total assets, $3.5bn liabilities) represents precisely the capital-intensity I avoid. Additionally, ADC-PA is a preferred share instrument — a fixed-income hybrid yielding 4.25% cumulative preferred dividends — not an equity compounding vehicle at all. There is no pricing power moat, no asset-light model, no self-funded growth, and no free cash flow to speak of. This is a bond substitute in a real estate vehicle; it is the antithesis of Fundsmith's criteria. I do not stretch my framework to assess it.

Key points

ADC-PA is a 4.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock depositary share — a fixed-income hybrid, not a quality equity compounder
REIT structure mandates ~90% income distribution, eliminating internal compounding — the engine of Fundsmith returns
ROCE of 3.38% is deeply sub-cost-of-capital; Fundsmith requires sustained 20%+ pre-tax ROCE
Free cash flow is deeply negative at -$370M (FCF margin -52%) due to growth capex of $875M vs operating cash flow of $504M
$1.75bn ATM equity program (April 2026) confirms the business is a serial external capital user, not self-funding
Capital-intensive real estate model with $9.8bn in assets is structurally opposed to Fundsmith's asset-light preference

Red flags

Preferred share instrument — not an equity compounder, no capital gains potential, just fixed coupon with call risk
Negative free cash flow: FCF = -$370M; reported profits ($204M net income) have zero cash backing on FCF basis
ROCE 3.38% vs any reasonable WACC — value-destructive returns on capital
Perpetual equity dilution machine: ATM program raises up to $1.75bn in new shares, continuously diluting common holders
Debt-funded growth model: capex ($875M) far exceeds operating cash flow ($504M), requiring ongoing debt/equity issuance
4.25% preferred yield offers minimal real return after inflation with full principal risk in a rising-rate environment

Fact base appendix

Price

last_close: 17.2
as_of: 2026-06-26
high_52w: 17.2
low_52w: 17.2
pct_below_52w_high: 0.0

Fundamentals

last_price: 17.2
market_cap: 9202660016
fifty_two_week_low: 16.8
fifty_two_week_high: 18.4429
beta: 0.479
change_pct: 0.29155
currency: USD
sector: Real Estate
industry: REIT - Retail
price_source: fmp_profile
bars: 1
entity: Agree Realty Corporation
fiscal_year: 2025
revenue: 718398000
revenue_period: 2025-12-31
net_income: 204349000
net_income_period: 2025-12-31
operating_income: 340395000
operating_income_period: 2025-12-31
operating_cash_flow: 504136000
operating_cash_flow_period: 2025-12-31
capex: 874500000
capex_period: 2024-12-31
total_assets: 9797612000
total_assets_period: 2025-12-31
total_liabilities: 3526459000
total_liabilities_period: 2025-12-31
stockholders_equity: 6270985000
stockholders_equity_period: 2025-12-31
cash_and_equivalents: 16295000
cash_and_equivalents_period: 2025-12-31
long_term_debt: 1693712000
long_term_debt_period: 2021-12-31
shares_outstanding: 120028299
operating_margin: 0.4738
net_margin: 0.2845
roe: 0.0326
debt_to_equity: 0.2701
current_ratio: None
roic: 0.0338
free_cash_flow: -370364000
fcf_margin: -0.5155
pe_ratio: 45.03
price_to_fcf: -24.85
price_to_sales: 12.81
revenue_cagr: 0.1868
revenue_cagr_years: 3
fundamentals_source: edgar_companyfacts
price_to_book: 1.47
earnings_yield: 0.0313
peg: 2.41

Filings reviewed

8-K (2026-05-14) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/917251/000091725126000050/adc-20260514.htm
8-K (2026-04-24) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/917251/000162828026027250/adc-20260424.htm
10-Q (2026-04-21) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/917251/000091725126000047/adc-20260331.htm
10-K (2026-02-10) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/917251/000091725126000013/adc-20251231.htm
10-Q (2025-10-21) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/917251/000110465925101233/adc-20250930x10q.htm
10-K (2025-02-11) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/917251/000155837025000803/adc-20241231x10k.htm

Other sources

[news] Agree Realty Corp (ADC) Earnings Forecast: Future EPS & Revenue Growth Estimates - TradingKey
[news] Agree Realty Corp (ADC) Institutional Confidence - TradingKey
[news] Director at Agree Realty (NYSE: ADC) buys 20,000 common shares - Stock Titan
[news] Agree Realty Corp (ADC) Stock Price Today & Analysis - Gotrade
[news] 10 Best Monthly Dividend Stocks For The Next 10 Years - Sure Dividend
[news] Agree Realty Corp (ADC) Technical Analysis: Support, Resistance, Indicators & Moving Averages - TradingKey
[news] Agree realty CEO Joey Agree buys $1.00m in ADC shares - Investing.com
[news] Agree Realty (NYSE: ADC) director Linglong He granted new RSUs and shares - Stock Titan
[news] RSU grant boosts Agree Realty (ADC) director Karen Dearing’s holdings - Stock Titan
[news] 10 Undervalued Monthly Dividend Stocks, Ranked In Order - Sure Dividend
[news] Insider Stock Purchases: January 12, 2026 - Quiver Quantitative
[news] Agree Realty: Executive chairman Richard Agree buys $357,050 in stock By Investing.com - Investing.com UK
[news] Monthly cash payouts rise 4.3% at Agree Realty, new July dates set - Stock Titan
[news] AGREE REALTY (NYSE: ADC) chair reports 5,000-share open-market purchase - Stock Titan
[news] Agree Realty Corp (ADC) Dividends & Stock Splits: Historical Payouts and Event Timeline - TradingKey

Generated 2026-07-17T19:12:36 · est. cost $1.25

What each investor thinks

AI & Disruption Referee (Christensen-style) Referee

pass · 82

Valuation Referee (Damodaran-style) Referee

watch · 55

Warren Buffett Quality

watch · 52

Charlie Munger Quality

watch · 52

Michael Mauboussin Quality

watch · 52

Ray Dalio Risk

watch · 48

Seth Klarman Value

watch · 48

Forensic Short-Seller (Chanos/Einhorn-style) Referee

watch · 48

Howard Marks Risk

avoid · 32

Benjamin Graham Value

avoid · 28

Walter Schloss Value

avoid · 28

Peter Lynch Growth

avoid · 22

Want this on a name you own?Send a ticker; we convene the full council on it.

Request Analysis →