vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Kimco Realty (KIM) and Regency Centers (REG), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Kimco Realty is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($542.5M vs $404.2M, roughly 1.3× Regency Centers). Regency Centers runs the higher net margin — 27.9% vs 50.1%, a 22.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Regency Centers posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (8.5% vs 3.2%). Over the past eight quarters, Regency Centers's revenue compounded faster (5.4% CAGR vs 3.8%).
Kimco Realty Corporation, headquartered in Jericho, New York, is a real estate investment trust that invests in shopping centers.
Regency Centers Corporation is a real estate investment trust based in Jacksonville, Florida, and is one of the largest operators of shopping centers with grocery stores as anchor tenants. As of October 21, 2020, the company owned 415 properties comprising 56-million-square feet of space. Notable properties owned by the company include Serramonte Center and a 30% interest in Village District.
KIM vs REG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $542.5M | $404.2M |
| Net Profit | $151.2M | $202.5M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 36.4% | 71.0% |
| Net Margin | 27.9% | 50.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 3.2% | 8.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | -9.0% | 134.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | — |
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 | $542.5M | $404.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $535.9M | $387.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $525.2M | $380.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.6M | $380.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $525.4M | $372.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $507.6M | $360.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $500.2M | $357.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $503.8M | $363.9M |
| Q4 25 | $151.2M | $202.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $137.8M | $109.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $163.0M | $106.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $132.8M | $109.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $166.0M | $86.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $136.0M | $101.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.7M | $102.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-11.0M | $109.8M |
| Q4 25 | 36.4% | 71.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.9% | 72.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 39.2% | 73.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 33.6% | 71.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 31.7% | 71.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 33.7% | 72.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 32.1% | 72.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 25.9% | 72.3% |
| Q4 25 | 27.9% | 50.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.7% | 28.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 31.0% | 27.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.8% | 28.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 31.6% | 23.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.8% | 28.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.9% | 28.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.2% | 30.2% |
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 | $211.6M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $7.7B | $4.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $10.4B | $6.9B |
| Total Assets | $19.7B | $13.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.74× | 0.69× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $211.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $159.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $226.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $131.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $688.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $789.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $126.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $133.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | $7.7B | $4.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $4.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.0B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $4.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $4.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $4.4B |
| Q4 25 | $10.4B | $6.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.5B | $6.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.5B | $6.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.6B | $6.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.7B | $6.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $10.5B | $6.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.6B | $6.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.6B | $7.0B |
| Q4 25 | $19.7B | $13.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $19.9B | $13.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $19.8B | $12.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $19.7B | $12.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $20.3B | $12.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $20.1B | $12.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.5B | $12.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $19.5B | $12.7B |
| Q4 25 | 0.74× | 0.69× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.72× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.72× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.69× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.75× | 0.66× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.65× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.64× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.63× |
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 | $258.4M | $203.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 0.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.71× | 1.01× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $258.4M | $203.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $332.4M | $218.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $305.4M | $244.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $223.8M | $161.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $239.5M | $191.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $295.9M | $227.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $294.1M | $203.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $176.1M | $167.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $205.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 38.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.71× | 1.01× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.41× | 2.00× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.87× | 2.30× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.69× | 1.47× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.44× | 2.21× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.18× | 2.24× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.46× | 1.98× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.53× |
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
KIM
Segment breakdown not available.
REG
| Shopping Centers | $418.0M | 103% |
| Propertymanagementservices | $4.1M | 1% |
| Assetmanagementservices | $1.7M | 0% |
