To Buy or Not to Buy: That is the Question

11/6/2013 | By Ralph Block

Published in the November/December 2013 issue of REIT magazine.

In late August Taubman Centers (NYSE: TCO) announced a program to repurchase up to $200 million of its outstanding common stock. With REIT stocks trading well off their highs, many at very substantial discounts to estimated net asset value (NAV), will more REITs announce similar programs? Should they?

Because REITs must pay 90 percent of their pre-tax net income to shareholders each and every year, they cannot retain much of their earnings. And, yet, today’s REITs are active businesses, continually needing capital for growth. Sure, REITs can, and do, borrow; but, as we learned in 2008-2009, debt leverage has its limits. Furthermore, equity capital is sometimes prohibitively expensive, and property sales are often counterproductive. Accordingly, the use of equity capital has always been a major focal point for REIT investors.

REIT organizations deploy their earnings in a number of ways, including dividend payments, property acquisitions, developments and debt reduction. But buying in company shares may, at times, be the best use of precious capital. This is standard fare at non-REIT companies (albeit with uneven success), but REITs don’t often avail themselves of this practice. Should they do more of it?

Whether REIT stock buybacks are the best use of equity capital is a complex issue. An obvious principle is, “buybacks are smart when they produce the best returns on a REIT’s capital.” But determining “best” is problematic – future returns are always uncertain.

"The use of equity capital has always been a major focal point for REIT investors."

Consider a REIT with a 45 percent debt-leverage ratio, where its shares are trading at a 15 percent discount to its estimated NAV. Should it be conservative and use available retained earnings to reduce debt? Or is acquiring properties in its markets or in promising new markets a better use? Or should the company develop new properties that are expected to provide a stabilized initial yield well above existing cap rates for similar properties in the same markets?  Or is buying in shares the best alternative?

Let’s add another dimension and consider risk-adjusted returns. Reducing debt is riskless, and it may augment the market value of the REIT’s outstanding shares – investors are often willing to pay a valuation premium for a less-levered REIT. Property acquisitions entail only modest risk – unless property values are about to decline. Development, of course, offers greater rewards, but comes with significantly more risk. And stock buybacks at prices below NAV create immediate NAV accretion – unless NAV declines because of market forces beyond the REIT’s control.

Thus, it would seem that the wisdom of any capital deployment choice is only as good as the REIT’s risk and return assumptions. And those, in turn, can be proven erroneous by poor execution or by unforeseen changes in the space and capital markets. Just as investing, itself, is more art than science, we must recognize that determining the “best” risk-adjusted returns on invested capital will always be an educated guess.

So, there is no free lunch. Each use of capital has its own unique risk and potential reward profile. Accordingly, REITs might seek to determine the kinds of investment returns that their shareholders are seeking and how much risk they are willing to assume. Existing and future space and capital market conditions affecting acquisitions and developments should also play an important role in such decisions. How cheap – or expensive – are debt and equity capital, and what’s the trend? How debt-levered is the REIT, and how large is the NAV discount at which shares can be repurchased?

In short, there are plenty of trade-offs and no certainty. I can only state the obvious: Investors will award higher valuations to those REITs that consistently allocate capital, through whatever means, to create the most shareholder value with the least risk.


Ralph Block is the author of “Investing in REITs” and “The Essential REIT” blog. Views expressed are solely those of the author.

Other Features

Reducing investment risk
Reducing Risk in Tough Markets
Today’s stock market is like Tombstone, Arizona, in the late 19th century–even the most careful visitor can, with a single misstep, get whacked. A...
Hans Nordby
The Upside of Online Retail
Commercial real estate investors fret over the increasing proportion of retail sales that take place online, decreasing demand for sticks-and-bricks...
Investing in Real Estate Smartly
What’s the best way to invest in commercial real estate – REITs or directly? This topic has been debated seemingly forever in trustee board rooms,...
Hans Nordby
When is the Next Recession?
Nobody likes a wet blanket. But the current economic cycle is six years old, and the commercial real estate party has been a raging good time for...
Perspective is Needed in the Investment World
After spending dozens of hours poring over REITs’ recent financial information and listening to their first quarter conference calls, my belief in...
Hans Nordby
Apartment Investors Need to Aim Small, Miss Small
Many apartment investors, especially big institutions, are making two big mistakes in the way they’ll underwrite investments over the next year. Both...
Ralph Block
REITs: The Next 10 Years
Equity REIT stocks, measured by the FTSE NAREIT All Equitys REITs Index, posted an amazing average annual total return of 11.22 percent in the last...
Population chart
Apartment Demand: Better, But Different, Than You Thought
Much has been written about oversupply in the apartment market, and certainly too many newly constructed class-A units are chasing far too few new...
Ralph Block
The Great Buyback Party
The Great Stock Buyback Party is in full swing. According to The Financial Times, in the 12 months ended March 31, 2014, “S&P 5010 companies...
Hans Nordby
It’s All Relative
All investing is a relative, not an absolute, game. If the stock market pops by 25 percent in one year and your fund is up 18 percent, you’re sort of...