Lamar Advertising (LAMR) vs W. P. Carey REIT (WPC)
Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 7, 2026.
Summary
Lamar Advertising (LAMR) has outperformed W. P. Carey REIT (WPC) over the past year, gaining 17.9% versus a loss of 8.0%. Over five years, LAMR leads with a +20.2% price change compared with -16.8% for WPC. Lamar Advertising is the larger company by market cap ($14.55 billion vs $14.29 billion), about 1.0 times the size, while W. P. Carey REIT is growing revenue faster (+8.4% vs +2.7%).
On valuation, W. P. Carey REIT trades at a lower forward P/E (19.9x vs 22.1x for Lamar Advertising). W. P. Carey REIT offers the higher dividend yield (5.90% vs 4.40%). W. P. Carey REIT converts more of its revenue into profit, with a net margin of 27.2% versus 25.9%.
Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology
Relative performance
Percent change in share price from the first common trading day shown; excludes dividends.
Head-to-head
| Metric | LAMR | WPC |
|---|---|---|
| Share price | $143.24 | $62.73 |
| Market cap | $14.55B | $14.29B |
| 1-day change | -1.04% | -2.00% |
| YTD return | +13.16% | -2.53% |
| 1-year return | +17.92% | -8.03% |
| 5-year return | +20.24% | -16.81% |
| P/E ratio (TTM) | 26.14 | 21.48 |
| Forward P/E | 22.10 | 19.92 |
| EPS (TTM) | $5.48 | $2.92 |
| Dividend yield | 4.40% | 5.90% |
| Annual dividend | $6.30 | $3.70 |
| Revenue (latest FY) | $2.27B | $1.72B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | +2.68% | +8.43% |
| Net income (latest FY) | $587.15M | $466.36M |
| Gross margin | 67.04% | — |
| Operating margin | 34.16% | — |
| Net margin | 25.91% | 27.17% |
| 52-week high | $166.33 | $77.22 |
| 52-week low | $114.45 | $62.71 |
| Distance from 52-week high | -13.88% | -18.76% |
| Analyst consensus | hold | buy |
| Avg. price target upside | +13.24% | +24.57% |
| Average volume | 580.78K | 1.40M |
| Shares outstanding | 87.13M | 227.82M |
| Employees | 3,500 | 199 |
| Sector | Real Estate | Real Estate |
| Industry | Real Estate Investment Trusts | Real Estate Investment Trusts |
Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.
Key differences
- LAMR has outperformed WPC by 26.0 percentage points over the past year.
- W. P. Carey REIT offers a meaningfully higher dividend yield (5.90% vs 4.40%).
- W. P. Carey REIT grew revenue faster in its latest fiscal year (+8.43% vs +2.68%).
About Lamar Advertising
LAMR stock →Lamar Advertising Company is one of the largest outdoor advertising companies in North America, with over 362,000 displays across the United States and Canada. Lamar offers advertisers a variety of billboards, interstate logo, transit and airport advertising formats, helping both local businesses and national brands reach broad audiences every day.
Real Estate · Real Estate Investment Trusts · 3,500 employees
About W. P. Carey REIT
WPC stock →W. P.
Real Estate · Real Estate Investment Trusts · 199 employees
LAMR vs WPC FAQ
Which is bigger, Lamar Advertising or W. P. Carey REIT?
Lamar Advertising (LAMR) is larger, with a market capitalization of $14.55B compared with $14.29B for W. P. Carey REIT (WPC).
Which stock has performed better over the past year, LAMR or WPC?
LAMR returned +17.92% over the past 12 months, compared with -8.03% for WPC (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.
Which has the lower P/E ratio, LAMR or WPC?
WPC has the lower trailing P/E at 21.5, versus 26.1 for LAMR. A lower P/E is not by itself a sign of a better investment; it can reflect slower expected growth or higher risk.
Which pays a higher dividend, Lamar Advertising or W. P. Carey REIT?
W. P. Carey REIT has the higher yield at 5.90%, compared with 4.40% for Lamar Advertising.
Are Lamar Advertising and W. P. Carey REIT in the same industry?
Yes. Both are classified in the Real Estate Investment Trusts industry within the Real Estate sector.