Namco Realty: Why Same-Asset Metrics Mislead in a Buy-Improve-Outparcel Model
In 2025 Namco’s adjusted same-property NOI fell to $156.5 million from $161.3 million, yet the company also acquired 15 assets with $46.5 million of actual NOI, sold 12 outparcels for $30.9 million, and removed 12 redevelopment-oriented assets from the adjusted base. Anyone reading Namco like a pure same-asset REIT misses the capital-recycling model, but anyone dismissing the metric misses that the legacy base did not truly strengthen either.
The main article already established that 2025 was not a stagnant year for Namco. Total NOI jumped, the company kept buying and selling assets, and capital kept moving through the portfolio. This follow-up isolates the part that is easiest to misread: same-asset metrics.
At first glance, a decline in adjusted same-property NOI looks like a simple signal. The legacy base weakened. But at Namco that is only part of the truth. The company explicitly says that same-asset analysis is not fully aligned with its strategy and can create economic distortion. In 2025 that argument has real support: outparcel sales, acquisitions underwritten with short leases that are expected to roll, and 12 assets management already views more as redevelopment candidates than as fully leased income properties.
The key point is two-sided. You should not throw out the same-asset metric, because it does say something uncomfortable about the quality of organic improvement. But you also should not treat it as the ultimate scorecard, because Namco is not trying to be a passive stabilized REIT. It is trying to buy, improve, carve out, sell, and recycle capital into the next opportunity.
One number, two different readings
Three numbers organize the 2025 read:
| Metric | 2024 | 2025 | What it actually says |
|---|---|---|---|
| Same-property NOI | $157.1 million | $165.6 million | The first headline looks positive |
| Adjusted same-property NOI | $161.3 million | $156.5 million | Once distortions are stripped out, the mature base weakened |
| Total NOI | $218.2 million | $290.2 million | The portfolio-level economics grew sharply |
The table and chart show why the debate matters. If you stay only with the same-property NOI headline, 2025 looks like improvement. But once the South Shore property-tax benefit, including recognition for prior years, is stripped out, and once 12 assets that the company is actively trying to sell are removed from the adjusted base, the picture changes: adjusted same-property NOI fell by $4.8 million.
That still does not invalidate the company’s argument. It just means the argument has to be read correctly. Same-asset metrics are not irrelevant at Namco, but they also cannot be the whole story. They help answer whether the mature base improved, and in 2025 the answer is not clean. At the same time, they miss the places where Namco is creating value by exiting parts of assets, selling parcels, or acquiring assets that were underwritten for future repositioning.
2025 was a capital-recycling year, not a classic same-asset year
The company explicitly says that, in the ordinary course of business, it realizes assets after extracting their improvement potential, and also sells certain parts of assets, usually at prices that reflect a profit versus the acquisition cost of that part. It also says that parcelization, splitting land rights into separate parcels, enhances property value and company profitability.
That is not a side note. It is the operating model. And in 2025 it shows up in the numbers:
| 2025 move | Scale | Economic meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Acquisition of 15 assets | $343.1 million of cost and $46.45 million of actual NOI | The company enlarged the income base through acquisitions |
| Sale of 17 full assets | $138.1 million of proceeds and only $3.589 million of NOI removed | Capital came out of sold assets without giving up much NOI |
| Sale of 12 outparcels across 11 properties | $30.9 million of proceeds and only $0.808 million of NOI removed | This is exactly what same-asset metrics struggle to capture |
This is the center of the thesis. On acquisitions, Namco brought in $46.45 million of actual NOI in 2025 against $343.1 million of cost. On full-asset sales, it received $138.1 million while giving up only $3.589 million of NOI. On outparcel sales, it generated $30.9 million of proceeds across 11 properties while the NOI removed from those parcels was only $0.808 million.
That spread explains why same-asset metrics alone are not enough. They do not capture the fact that the company can extract cash from pieces of assets without giving up an equivalent amount of recurring income. They also do not capture that Namco is replacing old capital with newly acquired NOI, meaning part of value creation happens outside the universe of mature legacy assets.
The annual report adds another important point: NOI itself does not include parcel-sale income, which totaled about $13.1 million in 2025. So even someone looking at total NOI still does not see the full economics of parcel sales. At Namco, part of value creation comes not only from rent but also from monetizing pieces of the real estate.
Why management says same-asset analysis is distorted here
Namco’s explanation in the filing is not abstract. It is concrete, and it breaks into three layers.
The first layer is outparcel sales. The company says same-asset analysis does not capture the high cash flows from outparcel sales that it executes on a recurring basis. 2025 is almost a textbook example: $30.9 million of proceeds, about $13.1 million of parcel-sale income, and only $0.808 million of NOI removed from the parcels that were sold.
The second layer is acquired assets with short leases. The company says it buys new assets every year and already assumes at acquisition that some existing leases will expire within one to two years and will not be renewed or replaced immediately. That effect is already reflected in the purchase price. So when those leases do roll and same-asset NOI weakens in the following year, management’s point is that this is not an operating surprise. It is the underwriting case playing out.
The third layer is assets being marketed for redevelopment-oriented sale. As of the report date, the company was working to sell 12 real-estate assets that management believes have reached the limit of their current yield potential. In management’s view, those assets can be worth more to a buyer as redevelopment opportunities, and in some cases can be worth more vacant or partially vacant than fully leased. That means they weigh on occupancy and same-property NOI while the company sees them as a capital source for reinvestment elsewhere.
The implication is straightforward: Namco is not measuring itself only by how stable rent is inside the same basket of properties. It is also measuring itself by the ability to take capital out of matured assets, absorb new assets at prices that already reflect future repositioning, and move the cash into other properties. That is a different economic model.
But the metric still matters, and it says something uncomfortable
It is easy to push the company’s argument too far, as if same-asset simply does not matter. That is the wrong read. 2025 shows that the adjusted metric still says something important: Namco’s mature base did not deliver clean organic growth.
Once South Shore is normalized and the 12 assets earmarked for sale are taken out, adjusted same-property NOI fell to $156.5 million from $161.3 million. So the right conclusion is not “management is right, the metric is meaningless.” It is “the metric captures only one layer, and that layer did not look especially strong in 2025.”
Put differently, 2025 was not a simple year of higher rent from the same portfolio. It was a year in which Namco generated growth by moving capital, by acquiring, and by monetizing, while the old base on its own did not produce a clean step-up. Anyone looking for a steadily compounding same-property REIT should treat that as a warning. Anyone looking at Namco as a buy-improve-outparcel platform should read the same data as only a partial diagnostic.
How Namco should be read from here
The correct way to read Namco is not to pick one lens and ignore the other. You need two screens at once.
The first screen is the same-asset screen. It asks whether the mature base, stripped of tax noise and assets already being prepared for monetization, actually improved. In 2025 that answer is relatively weak.
The second screen is the capital-recycling screen. It asks whether the company is extracting more value from the real estate than passive ownership alone would have produced. Here 2025 looks much better: large acquisitions, full-asset sales with relatively little NOI given up, outparcel sales with very high proceeds relative to lost NOI, and a clear statement that sale proceeds are meant to create value in other assets.
That also defines the 2026 checkpoints. First, whether the 12 assets marked for sale are actually monetized at values that justify giving up the current NOI. Second, whether assets acquired in 2023 to 2025, some of which are still being improved, begin to show fuller NOI contribution. Third, whether adjusted same-property NOI stabilizes or returns to growth after 2025 already stripped out both South Shore and the redevelopment-sale assets.
Conclusion
Same-asset metrics mislead at Namco not because they are wrong, but because they measure only one part of a machine that works through several layers. In 2025 they exposed something real: the legacy base did not improve smoothly, and adjusted same-property NOI actually fell. But they did not capture the whole economics of the year: 15 acquisitions carrying $46.45 million of actual NOI, 17 full-asset sales with only $3.589 million of NOI removed, and 12 outparcel sales that generated $30.9 million of proceeds plus roughly $13.1 million of parcel-sale income outside NOI.
That is why same-asset is a diagnostic metric at Namco, not the scoreboard. It tests the health of the existing base, but it does not by itself tell you whether the company is creating value. To understand 2025 you also have to look at capital recycling. That is where the thesis lives, and that is where the model will be tested beyond the headline of another year with higher total NOI.
Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.
The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.
The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.