vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of GENERATION INCOME PROPERTIES, INC. (GIPR) and Howard Hughes Holdings Inc. (HHH), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Howard Hughes Holdings Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($624.4M vs $2.5M, roughly 254.3× GENERATION INCOME PROPERTIES, INC.). Howard Hughes Holdings Inc. runs the higher net margin — -14.6% vs 1.0%, a 15.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, GENERATION INCOME PROPERTIES, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-8.0% vs -33.2%). Over the past eight quarters, Howard Hughes Holdings Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (91.0% CAGR vs 0.5%).
Emaar Properties is an Emirati real estate development company located in the United Arab Emirates. The two largest shareholders are Dubai ruler Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum and the UAE's sovereign wealth fund Investment Corporation of Dubai.
Howard Hughes Holdings Inc., formerly the Howard Hughes Corporation, is a real estate development and management company based in The Woodlands, Texas. It was formed in 2010 as a spin-off from General Growth Properties (GGP). Most of its holdings are focused on several master-planned communities. It took its name from the original Howard Hughes Corporation, which had developed the planned community of Summerlin, Nevada, and later became a subsidiary of GGP.
GIPR vs HHH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.5M | $624.4M |
| Net Profit | $-359.5K | $6.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -58.6% | 4.2% |
| Net Margin | -14.6% | 1.0% |
| Revenue YoY | -8.0% | -33.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -22.7% | -96.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.17 | $0.20 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $2.5M | $624.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5M | $390.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.4M | $260.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4M | $199.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.7M | $935.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4M | $327.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.3M | $317.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.4M | $171.1M |
| Q4 25 | $-359.5K | $6.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.8M | $119.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-4.4M | $-12.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.7M | $10.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-292.9K | $156.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-3.0M | $72.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-2.3M | $21.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.8M | $-52.5M |
| Q4 25 | -58.6% | 4.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -68.8% | 48.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -97.6% | 26.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -62.0% | 24.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -40.9% | 33.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -57.1% | 60.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -65.1% | 20.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -49.3% | -9.8% |
| Q4 25 | -14.6% | 1.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -114.4% | 30.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -181.8% | -4.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -114.7% | 5.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -11.0% | 16.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -123.7% | 22.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | -100.1% | 6.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -116.1% | -30.7% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.17 | $0.20 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.52 | $2.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.81 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.50 | $0.21 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.00 | $3.14 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.55 | $1.46 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.42 | $0.42 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.67 | $-1.06 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $6.2M | $1.5B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $5.1B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-4.2M | $3.8B |
| Total Assets | $97.3M | $10.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 1.35× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $6.2M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $247.3K | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $356.1K | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $630.6K | $493.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $612.9K | $596.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5M | $400.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.6M | $436.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $462.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | $5.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $5.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $-4.2M | $3.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $-3.9M | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.4M | $3.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.1M | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.8M | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.2M | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.1M | $3.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.9M | $2.9B |
| Q4 25 | $97.3M | $10.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.4M | $10.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $105.0M | $10.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $116.7M | $9.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $106.6M | $9.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $108.0M | $9.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $104.5M | $9.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $104.6M | $9.6B |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.35× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.85× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $513.9K | $360.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $348.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 55.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | 1.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | 60.04× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $417.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $513.9K | $360.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $935.4K | $149.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.2M | $177.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $718.2K | $-224.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $238.9K | $337.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $556.9K | $248.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $200.6K | $-17.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $26.0K | $-171.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $348.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $137.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $169.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-238.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $317.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-5.4M | $238.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-25.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-182.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 55.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 35.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 65.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -119.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 33.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -225.1% | 73.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -7.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -106.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 6.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 248.3% | 2.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 6.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 60.04× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.25× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -21.35× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.16× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.41× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -0.83× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GIPR
Segment breakdown not available.
HHH
| Transferred At Point In Time | $499.8M | 80% |
| Operating Assets Segment | $117.9M | 19% |
| Builder Price Participation | $12.9M | 2% |
