vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Kimco Realty (KIM) and Walker & Dunlop, Inc. (WD). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Kimco Realty is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($558.0M vs $340.0M, roughly 1.6× Walker & Dunlop, Inc.). Kimco Realty runs the higher net margin — 29.8% vs -12.9%, a 42.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Kimco Realty posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.0% vs -0.4%). Over the past eight quarters, Walker & Dunlop, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (22.1% CAGR vs 5.6%).
Kimco Realty Corporation, headquartered in Jericho, New York, is a real estate investment trust that invests in shopping centers.
Walker & Dunlop, Inc. is one of the largest commercial real estate finance and advisory services firms in the United States and internationally.
KIM vs WD — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $558.0M | $340.0M |
| Net Profit | $166.3M | $-13.9M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 37.2% | -17.2% |
| Net Margin | 29.8% | -12.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 4.0% | -0.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 23.7% | -131.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.46 | $-0.41 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q1 26 | $558.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $542.5M | $340.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $535.9M | $337.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $525.2M | $319.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.6M | $237.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $525.4M | $341.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $507.6M | $292.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $500.2M | $270.7M |
| Q1 26 | $166.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $151.2M | $-13.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $137.8M | $33.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $163.0M | $34.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $132.8M | $2.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $166.0M | $44.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $136.0M | $28.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.7M | $22.7M |
| Q1 26 | 37.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 36.4% | -17.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.9% | 13.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 39.2% | 14.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 33.6% | 2.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 31.7% | 15.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 33.7% | 12.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 32.1% | 10.4% |
| Q1 26 | 29.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 27.9% | -12.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.7% | 9.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 31.0% | 10.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.8% | 1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 31.6% | 13.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.8% | 9.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.9% | 8.4% |
| Q1 26 | $0.46 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.41 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.98 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.99 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.08 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.32 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.85 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.67 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $299.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $10.4B | $1.7B |
| Total Assets | $19.6B | $5.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $211.6M | $299.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $159.3M | $274.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $226.6M | $233.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $131.3M | $181.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $688.6M | $279.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $789.0M | $179.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $126.4M | $208.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.7B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.0B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $10.4B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $10.4B | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.5B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.5B | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.6B | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.7B | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $10.5B | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.6B | $1.7B |
| Q1 26 | $19.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $19.7B | $5.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $19.9B | $5.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $19.8B | $4.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $19.7B | $4.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $20.3B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $20.1B | $4.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.5B | $4.2B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.74× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.75× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | — | $-664.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-680.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -200.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 4.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-2.2B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $258.4M | $-664.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $332.4M | $-948.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $305.4M | $-238.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $223.8M | $-281.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $239.5M | $129.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $295.9M | $-202.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $294.1M | $-237.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-680.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-950.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-241.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $205.4M | $-284.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $116.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-204.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-241.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -200.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -281.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -75.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 38.3% | -120.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 34.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -69.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -89.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.0% | 4.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.0% | 0.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.0% | 0.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.4% | 1.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.71× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.41× | -28.34× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.87× | -7.02× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.69× | -102.07× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.44× | 2.89× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.18× | -7.01× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.46× | -10.49× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
KIM
| Revenues from rental properties, net | $552.8M | 99% |
| Management and other fee income | $5.2M | 1% |
WD
Segment breakdown not available.
