BackUniversal Health Realty Income Trust Overview
Universal Health Realty Income Trust

Universal Health Realty Income Trust P/E Ratio

Universal Health Realty Income Trust (UHT) has a P/E ratio of 30.51, above the Finance sector average of 16.82.

Get informed when a big investor buys or sells

+ Follow

P/E Ratio

30.51

P/E Ratio

30.51

The P/E ratio compares a company's stock price to its earnings per share. A lower P/E ratio may indicate that the stock is undervalued.

Average P/E Ratio (Comparison Companies)

Loading

P/E Ratio History

Loading

P/E Ratio Comparison

Loading

Universal Health Realty Income Trust (UHT) FAQ

Universal Health Realty Income Trust posts a P/E ratio of 30.51. That is above the Finance sector average of 16.82. Comparing that reading with peers and prior periods is usually more useful than looking at the number in isolation.

For Finance stocks, a P/E ratio near 16.82 is typical. Universal Health Realty Income Trust's 30.51 is higher that level. That is roughly 81.4% above the sector mean. Whether that is a warning or an opportunity depends on growth outlook and other fundamentals shown elsewhere on Stockcircle.

Universal Health Realty Income Trust's P/E ratio of 30.51 comes from dividing a price-based measure by a related financial statistic. Changes can come from the stock price moving, the underlying fundamental shifting, or both. Track both the level and the trend — a rising multiple on falling fundamentals is a different story than a rising multiple on rising earnings.

Context for UHT's P/E ratio usually means three checks: (1) trend versus prior periods, (2) level versus peers (average 16.82), and (3) consistency with growth and profitability. This page covers the first two; Universal Health Realty Income Trust's other metric pages and overview cover the third.

Judging Universal Health Realty Income Trust against Finance peers is usually better than using a market-wide rule of thumb. Business models inside Finance are more comparable, which makes gaps in P/E ratio easier to interpret. Start with 30.51 here, then scan peer and history charts to see if the gap is persistent.