I Find Stench in My Portfolio

As an update to the impact of the war in Iran, as I write this, the ceasefire has just been called by the US President. But just like inflation during COVID, the increase in prices for oil, fertilizer and other related products will continue. Increases from this day forward may not be as significant, but just like compounding interest, a 2% increase is added to the 40% increase since the war started.

Everything is costing more. Onions, all produce, and most things will rise in price. Just today, the airlines announced that despite the drop in oil prices, fuel prices will not drop immediately, so extra surcharges on tickets will continue.

Inflation is with us, supercharged by rising energy prices, despite the economic downturn.

In Canada, the interprovincial barriers continue and, in fact, are increasing. New Brunswick and Nova Scotia just announced increased fees if you want to “pass” through their province using a major highway. Tolls for “non-residents,” if you will.

Healthcare is the same. Nothing has changed, and provinces are seizing power to destroy our economy.

So, I’ll continue to add to this update throughout the month. My assumption is that inflation and a cement-like economy are with us in Canada for some time.

While it’s important to stay the course during stressful times, it doesn’t eliminate the need to continue investigating potential investments. Such a case is Firm Capital Property Trust. I first learned about this REIT in a Globe and Mail article about the recent purchase of mobile homes. So, I downloaded the past three years’ financials and asked Hank to do the work.

The report is in the Appendix.

My thoughts:

1. The company is not focused, with many different skews in Real Estate.

2. It doesn’t pass my stink test.

3. Dividend isn’t secure.

The Stink Test is the deal breaker for me. I don’t understand why these small REITs seem to think it's okay to be less than transparent with shareholders who invest their hard-earned dollars in a public company. I PASS and won’t even put it on my watch list.

In the Globe article, you never find the kind of scrutiny and deep dive that we do on companies. Buyer beware. 

After the analysis was completed, it was announced that the company was being taken over by Choice REIT. A small premium to the trading price. Doesn’t matter to me; you can’t pay me enough to ignore the stink.

Gold continues to rise, and I continue to believe we all need a bit for protection. The problem I’m having is the delivery delay from TD Precious Metals. They say it’s because of demand, but I’m not sure. Will keep you posted on this one. I purchased the latest batch in February, but it has still not been delivered to the bank.

Now, in Mid-April, I have just been informed that my gold is at the bank. It will stay there, but glad it has finally been delivered. 

What about Military Spending?

I’ve avoided investing in insurance, military, or weapons companies, as well as airline, drug, oil, and sugar-related companies. I just don’t like or understand them. I also have some ethical issues with each.

Given the need to defend ourselves worldwide, I am starting to consider drones and drone technology companies for civil defence. 

Stench seems to be everywhere, even in this sector. In a recent weekend edition of the Globe and Mail, Canadian Drone companies were featured. Of the 5 companies, 3 were private, leaving only 2 to be evaluated. The stench was unbearable after undergoing the Hank Stink Test. I emailed the author of the article to ask whether she had considered the many issues with the publicly traded companies she had featured. No answer, and I’ll keep you posted. 

In the Appendix, you will find my analysis of AEROVIRONMENT (AVAV), an American drone company in which I took a very small position. To me, right now, it seemed like the safest place to nibble a bit. I love my country, Canada, but our drone companies have nothing to offer value investors.

The Canadian Liberal Majority

At the writing of this, the Liberal Party has reached a majority. This means that for up to the next 3 years or so, they can do as they like with legislation and governance. It’s a great thing for hard asset investors. Spending and a lack of government urgency and productivity will hurt our economy. Owning hard assets, real estate, precious metals and certain public equities is supported more now than ever.

For employees, it’s not so great. If that is you, or you have a fixed income, keep investing and saving where possible. Keep a cash reserve to take advantage of opportunities and to protect yourself.

What I’m Reading

I’m diving into Stock Market Maestros, a great read to challenge a lot of my thinking. One particular theme I love is that the purpose of investing is to have your gains be significantly greater than your losses. It legitimizes the need to accept losses as a serious investor, but it also means understanding that the goal is to mitigate them and extend your successes. It’s a great read, and I strongly recommend it.

When I initially created the Ask Hank Reit ETF, I used the askhank.money tool, but at that time, it didn’t have the Stink test installed. I reran those companies and eliminated these because, in my opinion, they didn’t pass the stink test. I’ve put the short summaries at the end of this letter. Out are Marwest REIT, Sylogist and Northview Healthcare REIT (renamed Vital Infrastructure Property Trust), all three from the High-Risk ETF.

That leaves only Vital Hub (marginal concerns), Coveo and Enghouse (recently added). In the REIT ETF, I was surprised to have to sell Killam and Morguard. That only leaves Boardwalk and Canadian Apartment REIT. It’s a small list, but I’m ok with that. My bias is that if one thing is off, there is more stench we can’t see. In one example, the company was renting office space that was 50% owned by an Executive and Trustee of the REIT, as reported in the reviewed filings. That just plain stinks.

Here is a short post I had up on my LinkedIn site on the stink issue. Please make sure you run the full Hank Report on any stocks you own, and ask for a deep-dive stink test when you type the prompt. Protect yourself and your hard-earned dollars.

Why Every Investor Needs a Stink Test

Most investors start with returns. They should start somewhere else:
Should this be owned at all?
In most blowups, the warning signs weren’t hidden. They were disclosed.
Conflicts of interest.
Misaligned incentives.
Management is benefiting in ways investors weren’t.
The issue isn’t missing information.
It’s ignoring what’s already visible.
A stink test is simple:
Does anything about this feel off?
If it does — stop.
No model fixes bad judgment. The edge in investing isn’t seeing more — it’s walking away sooner.
If you think you are protected because your advisor or bank talks of their fiduciary duty to you, think again. Fiduciary duty requires the disclosure of conflicts even if that is on page 95 in fine print on an annual report. It does not require walking away from it.
So ask your advisor or check your stocks. Is there anything that smells in these investments? I found a lot in my portfolio and am now down to 5 publicly traded stocks I can trust on this issue. One sell was a Canadian REIT I had been owning for quite a while that I discovered rents out its head office space in a building 50% owned by a director of the Trust. That just plain stinks. Has your investment advisor or expert ever explained the stench in any of your investments? If not, ask today.

While watching American Greed the other day, waiting for a Blue Jays game to start, I watched the story unfold of a public company that made bulletproof vests for the Military. It was shocking how this public company squandered investors' money and eventually destroyed value. So I was intrigued to go and askhank.money to do a back-stink check. What if we had used Ask Hank prior to the SEC investigation of fraud? What would we have found? Well, Ask Hank would have warned us long before the information led to the FBI investigations, and we could have gotten out before it crashed. It’s Episode 5143 of American Greed on the American traded company DHB. The timeline is in the Appendix of this letter.

Why AI will not replace many SaaS Solutions

While AI is the rage today, it’s also touted as a primary threat to software that has long existed to help humans. As most of these SaaS companies have taken huge hits and write-downs, I’ve found three I have confidence in, and here are two reasons I believe AI will not destroy them.

The Shoelace Function Mote

When you put on a shoe, you tie it. It only takes a few seconds. It does what it is supposed to do, nothing more, nothing less. If you developed something to replace a shoelace, it would have to solve a current problem I have with shoelaces. Humans don’t have a problem with shoelaces, so there is no need for a replacement.

Specifically for SaaS software in a hospital setting, it’s very important to know when an emergency department bed is empty. When the patient goes home or is admitted to another ward, the current practice is for the nurse or attendant to click a box in the software that activates the system. The current software then alerts the cleaners that the bed needs to be made, and the staff are notified that a bed is available pending its cleaning. Someone with an AI focus may say we can automate that process. We can install a sensor in the bed and a video camera to cross-check and automatically tell people when the bed is empty. That would then trigger the cleaning and making of the new bed.

But that is an over-engineered solution to a non-problem. A nurse or attendant discharges the patient, physically moves them, or tells them they are good to go. They are already at a workstation, entering other data, so checking the box is not difficult or cumbersome. But the AI solution is.

Soon, we need maintenance on the sensors and video cameras. Privacy issues arise with a camera facing a bed. Patients aren’t feeling safe as they need to provide consent for such monitoring and surveillance. The cost of maintaining an AI solution for an empty bed diverts budget from patient care. It doesn’t solve anything. It’s an over-engineered solution to a non-problem. 

Clicking a box that a bed is empty is like the shoelace, all that is needed. It’s a shoelace mote. Simple with no problem to solve. That’s a huge SaaS mote that would stop a common-sense customer from even considering using AI for existing solutions.

The Human Psychological Mote

There are some basic things we are wired in our brains to do, and ways of thinking that AI can’t help with. We hate change. We already know how to use the hospital's existing software, and it does the job. Change is a very difficult thing. If you used AI for the bed vacancy example, you would need to train the entire staff in implementing the new software. You would have to train maintenance on the servicing and troubleshooting should a bed sensor fail or the video malfunction. You would have to utilize resources in the legal department to ensure that patients receive informed consent. Humans aren’t going to adopt such an AI solution.

This psychological mote also includes a benefit score. A new product or service designed to replace something that already exists must provide about a 10 times improvement in quality or service before humans consider adopting it. Is there a good AI solution that would do this?

At one of the companies I own, the software helps schedule services. It’s a scheduling platform, if you will. Another helps patients know the wait times at a hospital. While AI is being integrated to make the SaaS more efficient and helpful, it is not being used to replace it. The improvements are noticeable but far from the tenfold improvement needed to scrap the software and start anew with AI. Both the shoelace and psychological moats protect this SaaS function.

It is essential to use the shoelace and psychological moats when evaluating any SaaS company and its AI implementation. Start with common sense and ask yourself whether there is a problem that needs solving in any investment you are considering. Is it just using AI for AI's sake? Integrating AI into existing platforms will, in some cases, enhance efficiency and user benefits. Replacing the software and the companies that own it is neither necessary nor helpful.

This is part of my reasoning for the strong positions at Enghouse Technology, Vital Hub, and Coveo.

In closing, it’s a challenge to write a once-a-month letter, but I’ll keep working on it to improve it. I’m also tracking Savaria, a company I have been watching for a few years now. No investment, but worth a deeper watch. I’ve also done the analysis in the Appendix below. Bee well and take care. Hank

Appendix

ASK HANK™ — DHB INDUSTRIES TRUE TIMELINE (WITH DATES) Fraud Case

This information is for Educational Purposes only.
Do not make portfolio changes without speaking with your financial advisor.
I am not a financial advisor.

Key Inflection Point: 2003
That’s when the pattern became undeniable.

This information is for Educational Purposes only.
Do not make portfolio changes without speaking with your financial advisor.
I am not a financial advisor.

Ask Hank™ Full Analysis — Firm Capital Property Trust (TSX: FCD.UN)
Analysis Date: 2026-04-08
Share Price Used: $6.29

--------------------------------------------------

FULL HANK ANALYSIS

OVERVIEW

FCPT is a small Canadian REIT focused on grocery-anchored retail, industrial, multi-residential and manufactured housing. The portfolio remains defensive but slow-growing.

--------------------------------------------------

HANK 5 GROWTH FACTORS (2023–2025)

Revenue: 57.51M → 60.58M → 61.60M (CAGR ~3.5%)
Net Income: 15.37M → 33.89M → 25.72M (distorted)
AFFO: 16.70M → 18.64M → 18.36M (CAGR ~4.9%)
Distribution: flat at 0.520
Equity: 291.69M → 312.90M (CAGR ~3.6%)

--------------------------------------------------

KEY HANK METRICS

Price / Book: 0.74x
Price / NAV: 0.79x
Discount to NAV: ~21%
Hank Cap Rate: ~7.9%
Dividend Yield: ~8.3%
AFFO Payout: ~105%
FFO Payout: ~103%
Debt / GBV: ~50%
Payback Years: ~9

--------------------------------------------------

PER-SHARE COMPOUNDING

AFFO per unit: 0.452 → 0.505 → 0.497
FFO per unit: 0.504 → 0.523 → 0.507
Distribution: flat
NAV: rising slowly

Conclusion: slow compounding, not accelerating.

--------------------------------------------------

BALANCE SHEET REVIEW

Assets: 645M
Mortgages: 304M
Credit Facility: 14.7M
Equity: 312.9M
Debt ratio: 50%

Conclusion: stable but not conservative.

--------------------------------------------------

CAPITAL ALLOCATION REVIEW

Positive:
- No dilution
- Stable portfolio
- Some deleveraging

Negative:
- High payout ratio maintained
- External fee structure

--------------------------------------------------

RELATED-PARTY / GOVERNANCE REVIEW

FCRPI (related):
- Asset management
- Financing support
- Investor relations
- Executive functions

FCPMC (related):
- Property management
- Leasing
- Construction management
- Up to 5% development fees

DISCLOSED FEES:

2023:
Asset mgmt: 3.399M
Property mgmt: 1.358M
Performance fee: 0.434M

2024:
Asset mgmt: 3.390M
Property mgmt: 1.454M
Performance fee: 0.887M

2025:
Asset mgmt: 3.431M
Property mgmt: 2.398M
Performance fee: 1.914M

Other:
- Joint arrangements with insiders
- Related office lease
- Performance fee liability increasing

Small vendor related-party transactions:
Not specifically disclosed.

STINK TEST:

Asset mgmt structure: Starting to Stink
Property mgmt + development fees: Starting to Stink
Performance fee liability: Needs Monitoring
Joint arrangements: Needs Monitoring

--------------------------------------------------

10 HANK RULES

1. Hive First: 6
2. Simplicity: 6
3. Debt Discipline: 6
4. Efficiency: 6
5. Moat: 7
6. Compounding: 5
7. Capital Allocation: 5
8. Probability: 6
9. Governance: 4
10. Sentiment: 6

TOTAL SCORE: 57 / 100

--------------------------------------------------

RISKS

- Dividend not covered
- External management structure
- Refinancing risk
- Fee conflicts

--------------------------------------------------

MUNGER INVERSION

Do not buy if:
- You need safe income
- You dislike external management
- You want clean governance
- You need strong compounding

--------------------------------------------------

GRAHAM VIEW

Cheap on assets.
Weak on earnings quality.
Governance discount justified.

--------------------------------------------------

FINAL VERDICT

Cheap but not clean.

Watchlist / Speculative value only.

--------------------------------------------------

ASK HANK™ ONE-PAGE SUMMARY

Date: 2026-04-08
Stock: FCD.UN
Price: $6.29
Hank Score: 57/100

FCPT trades at a discount to book and NAV, with an 8% yield. However, the dividend is not well covered, with payout ratios above 100%.

The key issue is governance. The REIT uses a related-party external management structure with asset management, property management, leasing, and performance fees all flowing to related entities.

While the real estate portfolio is stable and defensive, per-unit growth is slow and inconsistent.

This is not a high-quality compounder.

Conclusion:
Cheap enough to watch.
Not clean enough to trust.

Main monitor:
AFFO per unit vs related-party fees.

--------------------------------------------------

Ask Hank™ Monthly Letter
https://www.askhankyourmoneycoach.ca/subscribe

--------------------------------------------------

This information is for Educational Purposes only.
Do not make portfolio changes without speaking with your financial advisor.
I am not a financial advisor.

Appendix

ASK HANK™ FULL ANALYSIS — AEROVIRONMENT (AVAV)

Date: April 9, 2026 | Price: $186.94 | Hank Score: 64/100

DISCLAIMER:

This information is for Educational Purposes only.

Do not make portfolio changes without speaking with your financial advisor.

I am not a financial advisor.

BUSINESS:

AeroVironment has evolved from a drone/munition manufacturer into a full-spectrum defense platform spanning autonomous systems, AI software, space, cyber, and directed energy. Customers are primarily U.S. DoD and allies.

FINANCIALS (2023–2025):

Revenue: 540.5M → 716.7M → 820.6M

Net Income: -176.2M → 59.7M → 43.6M

Adj EPS: 1.26 → 2.99 → 3.28

Equity: 551M → 823M → 886M

GROWTH:

Revenue CAGR ~15–18%. Earnings improving but inconsistent.

SHARE COUNT (CRITICAL):

Reported shares: ~26M → ~28M

True economic ownership expanded significantly post-BlueHalo.

Conclusion: Transformational dilution. Per-share returns reduced.

PER-SHARE IMPACT:

EPS and book value per share diluted. Growth does not fully translate to shareholders.

MARGINS:

-33% → 10% → ~5%. Improving but unstable.

BALANCE SHEET:

Strong equity base, but now supporting a larger, more complex business.

CAPITAL ALLOCATION:

Tomahawk Robotics: software/control layer.

BlueHalo (~$4B): space, cyber, directed energy.

Classification: High-conviction, high-risk transformation.

METRICS:

P/B ~6x+, Cash Flow Yield ~2% or lower, Payback ~30–40+ years.

No buybacks, no dividend.

MOAT:

Improving via full-stack integration and AI positioning.

Execution risk remains high.

RISKS:

Integration (BlueHalo), overpayment, dilution, government dependency, margin volatility.

AI:

Tailwind and core capability.

MUNGER INVERSION:

Fails if integration fails, budgets slow, or dilution continues.

GRAHAM:

Not a value stock.

STINK TEST:

No related-party abuse. Governance clean.

Capital allocation risk elevated.

HANK RULES:

Hive 7 | Nature 6 | Recycle 4 | Efficiency 6 | Moat 9 | Compounding 4 | Allocation 7 | Success 6 | Governance 8 | Buzz 9

VERDICT:

Transformation story. Good direction, but high execution risk and expensive valuation.

ASK HANK™ MONTHLY LETTER:

https://www.askhankyourmoneycoach.ca/subscribe

ONE PAGE SUMMARY:

Ask Hank™ AVAV Summary | Date: April 9, 2026 | Price: $186.94 | Score: 64/100

AeroVironment is now a full-spectrum defence platform following a ~$4B acquisition (BlueHalo).

Revenue growth is strong, but dilution is significant, reducing per-share returns.

The thesis shifts from growth to execution.

Positives: AI leadership, defence tailwinds, expanded capabilities.

Risks: Integration, dilution, overpayment, government dependence.

Verdict: High-risk transformation. Not a value investment.

DISCLAIMER:

This information is for Educational Purposes only.

Do not make portfolio changes without speaking with your financial advisor.

I am not a financial advisor.

Appendix  Sold Holding

Ask Hank™ Full Analysis — Vital Infrastructure Property Trust (VITL)

Analysis Date: April 9, 2026 | Share Price: $5.52

Business Snapshot

Global healthcare REIT with 133 properties, ~96% occupancy, long lease terms (~12 years).

Multi-Year Financials

Revenue declining (2023: 508M ® 2025: 422M). Net income improved in 2025 but driven by non-core

items.

AFFO improving to $0.42/unit. NAV declined to $7.55.

Key Metrics

Price/NAV: 0.73x | AFFO Yield: ~7.6% | Payback: ~13 years | Payout: 86%

Balance Sheet

Leverage reduced to ~52%. Liquidity improved to ~$465M. Still moderately high debt load.

Capital Allocation

Asset sales, simplification, DRIP suspended. However NAV destruction occurred.

Governance / Stink Test

Vital Trust control structure (minority ownership + control): Stinks

Management fees from affiliates (~$9.8M total): Starting to Stink

Internalization payment ($170M): Needs monitoring

No small vendor related-party issues disclosed

Risks

Leverage, NAV decline, historical complexity, reliance on asset sales

Verdict

Turnaround story. Improving but not a clean compounding REIT.

One Page Summary

Ask Hank™ One-Page Summary

Date: April 9, 2026

Price: $5.52

Hank Score: 56/100

2025 improved fundamentals:

AFFO/unit rose to $0.42

Payout improved to 86%

Leverage down to 52.4%

Liquidity up to $465M

Negatives:

NAV dropped to $7.55

Governance complexity remains

Related-party fee structures persist

Valuation:

0.73x NAV, ~7.6% AFFO yield

Verdict:

Not a clean compounder.

Improving turnaround with governance baggage

Ask Hank™ Summary — April 16, 2026 Sold Holding

Killam Apartment REIT | Price: $17.14

Hank Score: 7.7 / 10

Killam is a real apartment REIT with a large Canadian asset base and improving operations. Property revenue rose from about $345M in 2023 to $383M in 2025, and NOI climbed to $255M. The balance sheet is leveraged but sensible, with debt around the low-40% range against investment properties.

The stock looks cheap on diluted NAV, at roughly 0.69x book, but only fair on a conservative cash-yield basis. Using cash from operations less capital expenditures, the owner cash flow proxy is about $0.53 per unit, or a 3.1% Hank Cap Rate. That means the value case depends more on asset value and rent growth than on immediate cash yield.

Deep stink dive: no obvious small-vendor self-dealing showed up, but there is a real related-party issue. Killam owns 50% of two Halifax commercial buildings, while the other 50% is owned by an executive and trustee, and Killam’s head office pays rent there. That is not a rat, but it needs monitoring.

From the 2025 annual report: “Killam owns a 50% interest in two commercial properties located at 3700 and 3770 Kempt Road in Halifax, NS, and the remaining 50% interest in these properties is owned by an executive and Trustee of Killam. Killam's head office occupies approximately 26,000 SF of one of the buildings with base rent of approximately $14.00 per SF, of which 50% is paid to the related party based on the ownership interest.”

Hank verdict: Selling, the stink. Who can you trust?

ASK HANK™ SUMMARY Added to Watch List

Date: April 16, 2026

Savaria (SIS)

Price: $28.78

Hank Score: 79.5/100

Savaria is a good business in a strong long-term market. Aging demographics support demand for elevators, lifts, stairlifts, and patient-care products. The big improvement is not sales growth alone. It is quality. Gross margin rose from 32.2% in 2022 to 38.7% in 2025. Adjusted EBITDA margin rose from 15.2% to 20.4%. Net debt to EBITDA fell from 2.07x at the end of 2023 to 1.03x at the end of 2025.

That is real progress.

The weak spot is valuation. At $28.78, price-to-book is about 3.2x and the Hank Cap Rate using 2025 operating cash flow is about 6.7%. Payback years are roughly 28.5. That is not cheap.

Governance does not presently stink, but family influence is meaningful and should be watched. I found no clear red-flag related-party abuse in the surfaced material.

Bottom line:

Good company. Better business than before. Not a bargain price.

Status: Hold / Watch, not screaming buy.

ASK HANK™ SUMMARY-Keeper Holding

Date: April 16, 2026

Coveo (CVO)

Price: $4.58

Hank Score: 73.5/100

Coveo is a real enterprise AI software business, not a story stock. Revenue grew from $112.0M in FY2023 to $133.3M in FY2025. Adjusted EBITDA improved from -$16.3M to +$1.0M, and operating cash flow improved from -$6.3M to +$11.1M. The balance sheet is solid, with $124.8M cash at March 31, 2025 and no debt draw.

The good: strong cash position, meaningful share buybacks, blue-chip customers, and a platform that benefits from AI adoption. The bad: still loss-making, stock-based comp is heavy, latest nine-month update showed wider losses again, and the Hank Cap Rate using FY2025 free cash flow is only about 2.2%.

Governance does not stink, but dual-class control and stock comp should be watched. I found no obvious related-party abuse.

Bottom line:

Good business quality. Better than many small software names. But not a classic cheap Hank buy because present owner cash flow is still light.

Status:

Speculative hold / watchlist.

Needs stronger earnings power or a cheaper price for a clear buy.

Ask Hank™ Summary — April 16, 2026 Sold Holding

Marwest REIT | Price: $0.75

Hank Score: 3.9 / 10

Marwest is a 4-property apartment REIT with ~$142M in assets and ~70% leverage. Revenue growth is weak (~3%), and real cash flow is flat. Earnings are dominated by fair value gains, which collapsed in 2025, exposing the lack of true operating growth.

Normalized FFO is ~$0.21/unit, implying a high apparent yield (~28%) and low P/B (~0.18x). However, these metrics are misleading due to illiquidity, small scale, and reliance on appraisal-based valuations.

Capital allocation shows no compounding engine — just holding assets with periodic equity issuance. Governance shows no major related-party abuse but structural concerns (exchangeable units, valuation reliance) create a “starting to stink” profile.

This is not a compounding business. It is a leveraged asset play dependent on stable property valuations.

Hank Verdict: Avoid unless treating strictly as speculative deep value real estate exposure.

Ask Hank™ CAPREIT Analysis — April 16, 2026- Keep Holding

Price: $37.46

NAV: $56.41

Discount: ~34%

FFO: $2.54

Yield (Hank Cap): 6.78%

Payout: ~61% (safe)

Hank Score: 75 / 100

What You Own:

Large Canadian apartment REIT with ~45K units, high occupancy, and strong balance sheet.

What’s Working:

- Deep discount to NAV

- Aggressive buybacks at value

- Strong capital recycling (selling weak assets, buying better ones)

- Very clean governance (no related-party issues found)

What’s Not:

- Slow FFO growth (~3%)

- Revenue shrinking due to asset sales

- Political risk (rent control)

- Interest rate sensitivity

Balance Sheet:

Solid (~39% debt, mostly CMHC insured)

Verdict:

This is a conservative income + value play.

Not a growth story.

You are betting on:

1) NAV discount closing

2) Stable long-term housing demand

Risk:

Could remain undervalued for years (value trap)

Hank View:

Good business.

Fairly cheap.

Requires patience.

Ask Hank™ One-Page Summary
Date: 2026-04-23
Boardwalk REIT (BEI.UN)
Price used: $66.35
Hank Score: 82/100

Boardwalk looks cheap against NAV. Reported NAV per unit is $96.23, so the unit trades at about 0.69x NAV. AFFO per unit was $4.02 and FFO per unit was $4.65 in 2025, giving an AFFO yield of about 6.1% and FFO yield of about 7.0% at your price. Revenue, FFO per unit, dividend, and NAV per unit all grew nicely from 2023 to 2025. The weak spot in the 3-year numbers is net income, but that is not the right main lens for this REIT.

The balance sheet is workable, not light. Debt to EBITDA improved to 10.0x and interest coverage improved to 3.08x. About 96% of mortgages are CMHC insured, which helps. The main watch item is 2026 mortgage renewals.

Deep stink dive result: not a blow-up, but not perfectly clean. Sam Kolias and Van Kolias receive LP Class B distributions on equal terms with trust units, fully disclosed. The real watch item is a disclosed related-party IT-services arrangement where I could not verify a dollar amount in the audited note excerpt. That moves governance to “needs monitoring.”

Bottom line: attractive REIT, decent margin of safety, but keep one eye on debt and one eye on governance.