セーフホールドの2026年第3四半期決算説明会：金利変動で新規組成が鈍化、EPSは0.41ドル

Safehold（NYSE: SAFE）が発表した2026年第3四半期決算は前年同期比で横ばいとなった一方、急激な金利変動により取引の確実性が低下し、定期借地権（グラウンドリース）の新規組成が減速した。経営陣は引き続きアフォーダブル・ハウジング（低中所得者向け住宅）、集合住宅の資本再編、開発機会に注力している。

主なポイント

• 第3四半期の売上高は1億1,870万ドル、純利益は2,880万ドル、EPSは0.41ドルだった。EPSは前年同期比で横ばいとなった。
• Safeholdは総額3,800万ドルとなる2件の定期借地権を新規組成し、年初来の組成額は約2億4,200万ドルに達した。新規リースの経済的利回りは加重平均で7.3%、GLTV（定期借地権対評価額比率）は39%、レント・カバレッジは2.7倍となった。
• ポートフォリオの総簿価は四半期末時点で74億ドルとなった。未実現キャピタルゲインの推計値は前四半期比で約1億ドル増加し、99億ドルに達した。
• 利用可能流動性は13億ドルで、非担保資産は約50億ドルだった。総有利子負債は51億ドルで、レバレッジは2.01倍から2.04倍に上昇した。
• 経営陣によると、8月下旬から10月上旬にかけて米10年物国債利回りが約70ベーシスポイント上昇したことで不動産取引が混乱し、価格見直し（リプライシング）やクロージングの遅延が増加したという。
• Safeholdは第4四半期に入っても自社株買いを継続した。経営陣は、合弁事業（JV）やその他の民間資本構成を活用してレバレッジを管理しつつ、組成額を拡大することが長期的な優先課題であると述べた。

主要財務データ

EPSの安定は、資産投資実行による純利益増加（ネット・アクリーション）と保有ホテルからのプラスの貢献を反映している。これらの好影響は、Star Holdingsからの運用報酬の減少、非連結ジョイントベンチャー収益の低下、および非現金性の一般引当金の小幅な増加によって相殺された。

Safeholdは当四半期中に経済的利回り7.4%で1億700万ドルの定期借地権投資を実行した。また、SOFR＋425ベーシスポイントで500万ドルの借地権ローンを実行した。

事業および営業実績

第3四半期の新規組成はいずれもリピート顧客によるアフォーダブル・ハウジング案件だった。1件はサンフランシスコ・ベイエリア、もう1件はサンアントニオに所在している。経営陣によると、アフォーダブル・ハウジングの年初来組成規模は、2024年と2025年の年間実績のほぼ2倍に達したという。

パイプラインは引き続き、アフォーダブル・ハウジング、一般相場（マーケットレート）集合住宅の資本再編、集合住宅開発の3分野に集中している。Safeholdが集合住宅を選好するのは、その流動性、長期的なファンダメンタルズ、そして定期借地権所有者にとってのリスク調整後リターンが優れているためである。

経営陣はまた、低利回りの不動産債務が満期を迎えることにも機会を見出している。定期借地権を活用することで、オーナーは経営権を維持し、より割高なレスキュー・キャピタル（救済資金）を回避できると同社は述べている。新規開発の場合、この仕組みにより開発業者の必要自己資本を削減し、全体の資本コストを引き下げることができる。

しかし、金利の変動性により、定期借地権とともにデットとエクイティを調整する際の再交渉（リトレード）や価格見直しの頻度が高まっている。経営陣は、パイプラインの規模は比較的安定しているものの、クロージングの確実性は低下していると述べた。

貸借対照表と資本配分

Safeholdの第3四半期末時点の債務内訳は、無担保債務が28億ドル、ノンリコース担保付債務が13億ドル、無担保リボルビング信用枠の借入残高が7億6,500万ドル、非連結定期借地権合弁事業における持分相当の債務が2億7,000万ドルとなった。

長期固定化債務（パーマネント・デット）の加重平均残存期間は約18年、実質コストは4.4%で、2029年まで大規模な満期到来はない。また同社は、2028年4月まで3.0%の5億ドルのSOFRスワップを維持している。

Safeholdはムーディーズから「A3」、S&Pおよびフィッチから「A-」の投資適格格付けを維持しており、見通しはいずれも「安定的」である。

経営陣は同社の目標レバレッジを2.0倍とし、約2億5,000万ドルの追加案件投資を実行した場合、レバレッジは約0.1倍上昇すると説明した。定期借地権の未実行コミットメントは合計約1億2,000万ドルで、今後数四半期にわたり資金供給される見込みである。

リスクと注視すべき分野

• 金利変動：長期金利の急激な変動が取引を遅延させ、顧客の成約意欲を低下させている。
• 組成ペース：第3四半期の新規組成は3,800万ドルにとどまり、経営陣は現在の水準からの拡大を求めている。
• 顧客の受容度：経営陣によると、足元の7%台前半から半ばの利回りは、顧客がまとまった取引量で受容できる上限に近い可能性が高い。
• 資本配分：レバレッジが目標の2.0倍近辺にあるなか、Safeholdは新規組成と自社株買いのバランスを取っている。
• 配当方針：課税対象所得が現在低水準にあるため、配当の多くは裁量的となっている。経営陣は取締役会と方針の検討を継続していると述べた。
• 訴訟問題：経営陣はマンハッタン・ミッドタウンのオフィスから住宅への転換案件に進展はないと報告し、パーク・ホテルズ関連の手続きも遅れていると説明した。

アナリスト質疑応答のハイライト

経営陣は、アンレバードの長期クレジット・リターンのベンチマークは6%台前半であると述べた。最近の取引では7%台前半から半ばの利回りを達成している。CPI調整を含めると、これらのリターンは7%台半ばから8%の範囲に達する可能性があり、さらに潜在的なCaret持分の経済的リターンが加わるとSafeholdは見込んでいる。

取引の価格設定について、経営陣は組成規模と利回りのトレードオフを強調した。利回りを7%超の水準へと大きく引き上げれば、特に集合住宅部門での需要が減退する可能性がある。一方、他の不動産セクターではより高い利回りを得る機会が存在する可能性があるとした。

ポートフォリオのリサイクル（資産入替）手法としては、引き続き合弁事業が選好されている。経営陣は、この仕組みにより、Safeholdが支配権、経済的権利、将来の潜在的な再買い取り権を保持しつつ、資金を調達しレバレッジを管理できると述べた。資産の完全売却は、第2四半期に完了した合弁事業に類似したスキームよりも可能性が低いとみられる。

経営陣はまた、リースポートフォリオの90%超にわたるインフレ保護を強調した。2018年および2019年頃から組成されたリースにおけるCPIルックバック条項が今後数年間にわたり順次発効し、賃料が改定され、より高い基準から将来の成長が複利で積み上がることが期待されている。

Star Holdingsに関して、Safeholdは四半期末に小幅な融資変更契約に合意した。経営陣によると、この変更によりマージンローンの返済を通じて債権保全が強化され、第4四半期の一時的な手数料としてではなく、時間の経過とともに認識される追加的な経済的価値が得られたという。

決算説明会トランスクリプト全文

決算説明会の完全なトランスクリプト

経営陣による説明

Operator

Good afternoon, and welcome to Safehold's Third Quarter Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, today's conference is being recorded.

At this time, for opening remarks and introductions, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Pearse Hoffmann, Senior Vice President of Capital Markets and Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Pearse Hoffmann

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us today for Safehold's earnings call. On the call, we have Jay Sugarman, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Michael Trachtenberg, President; Brett Asnas, Chief Financial Officer; and Steve Wylder, Executive Vice President, Head of Investments.

This afternoon, we plan to walk through a presentation that details our third quarter results. The presentation can be found on our website at safeholdinc.com by clicking on the Investors link. There will be a replay of this conference call beginning at 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time today. The dial-in for the replay is (877) 481-4010 with a confirmation code of 54694. [Operator Instructions]

Before I turn the call over to Jay, I'd like to remind everyone that statements in this earnings call, which are not historical facts may be forward-looking. Our actual results may differ materially from these forward-looking statements, and the risk factors that could cause these differences are detailed in our SEC reports. Safehold disclaims any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements, except as expressly required by law.

Now with that, I'd like to turn it over to Chairman and CEO, Jay Sugarman.

Jay?

Jay Sugarman

Thanks, Pearse, and thanks to everyone joining us today. No question, our business gets tough during periods when long rates rise to 20-year highs. With some of the longest duration assets in the capital markets, we are naturally sensitive to long rates moving higher. But unlike straight fixed income instruments, Safehold ground leases typically include inflation kickers. Its balance sheet has long-term debt that becomes more valuable as rates rise, and its embedded upside from Caret can benefit over the long term if replacement costs increase and supply is suppressed due to higher interest rate levels.

Over the 99-year life of our ground leases, we should expect rates to rise and fall and cause asset values to go up and down. But the core strengths of the ground lease business have been historically proven, and the long-term compounding they can create should reward patience and enable shareholders to capture a combination of investment benefits that are hard to replicate anywhere else in the market. It may take time, and it's definitely rough right now, but we think all the work will pay off in the end.

With that in mind, let me have Michael and Brett recap the quarter and take you through the details.

Michael?

Michael Trachtenberg

Thank you, Jay, and good afternoon, everyone. I'll begin with our investment activity for the quarter, then discuss trends we're seeing in our pipeline before passing it to Brett to review the portfolio and financial results.

During the third quarter, we originated 2 ground leases for an aggregate commitment of $38 million, bringing year-to-date volume to approximately $242 million. Both closings were within our affordable housing subsector with repeat customers, with one located in the San Francisco Bay Area and the other in San Antonio. The deals combined carry a 7.3% economic yield, 39% GLTV and 2.7x rent coverage.

Turning to the broader market. There is no doubt the recent upward move in rates has been disruptive to transaction activity, at least in the short run. From late August to early October, the 10-year Treasury yield was up nearly 70 basis points. There has been some relief since then, but that sharp of a move is naturally going to have an impact on the real estate capital markets ecosystem. As it relates to Safehold, our pipeline is focused on areas that are most actionable over the next few quarters. We continue to see positive interest from customers in our growing affordable housing business, which is generally more insulated from day-to-day rate volatility.

There's a clear need for more affordable housing supply nationally, and we positioned our ground lease as a way to fill capital gaps and spur more development, which has been well received by both developers and municipalities. Year-to-date, we've nearly doubled annual production from both 2024 and 2025 and believe we're establishing lasting advantages in the sector, both in terms of product knowledge and relationships. We're also beginning to see opportunities emerge for both recapitalizations and high-quality developments. There's an entire vintage of assets with low-cost debt coming due.

And as lenders force more action, we believe ground leases can play a useful role in helping owners maintain control of their properties and avoid expensive rescue capital. For new development, capital costs and construction costs are each straining the economics and viability of certain projects. Ground leases can help solve that by lowering developer equity commitments and cost of capital. In terms of portfolio targets, we are evaluating opportunities across property sectors that generally favor multifamily for its liquidity, long-term fundamentals and attractive risk-adjusted returns with the ground lease owner.

I'll now hand it over to Brett for an overview of the portfolio and our financials.

Brett Asnas

Thank you, Michael. At quarter end, the portfolio stood at $7.4 billion of aggregate gross book value, and estimated unrealized capital appreciation was $9.9 billion, up approximately $100 million from last quarter. Portfolio GLTV and rent coverage were unchanged at 52% and 3.4x, respectively, and we finished the quarter with $1.3 billion of available liquidity. During the quarter, we funded $112 million, including $107 million of ground lease fundings at a 7.4% economic yield and $5 million of leasehold loans at SOFR+425 basis points.

Turning to earnings. Revenue for the third quarter was $118.7 million. Net income was $28.8 million and earnings per share was $0.41. EPS was flat year-over-year as net accretion from asset fundings and positive owned hotel contributions were offset by lower management fees from Star Holdings, lower unconsolidated JV earnings, along with modestly higher noncash general reserves.

Moving to the balance sheet. We maintain an A3 rating from Moody's and A- ratings from S&P and Fitch, all with stable outlooks. We have approximately $5 billion of unencumbered assets, which further enhances our flexibility. We ended the quarter with $5.1 billion of debt, consisting of $2.8 billion of unsecured debt, $1.3 billion of nonrecourse secured debt, $765 million drawn on our unsecured revolver and $270 million of our pro rata share of debt on ground leases that we own in unconsolidated joint ventures.

We maintain a $500 million SOFR swap at 3.0% through April 2028 to hedge our limited floating rate borrowings and have long-term Treasury locks at a mark-to-market gain position of approximately $4 million to be applied to future permanent debt. Our liability structure remains a strong source of value and differentiation for the company. Safehold's permanent debt has a weighted average maturity of approximately 18 years, locked at an effective cost of 4.4% with no significant maturities until 2029.

On a mark-to-market basis, we estimate our below-market debt has approximately $800 million of embedded value, which is roughly Safehold's market cap today. Leverage ticked up modestly from 2.01x to 2.04x, primarily due to investment fundings and share repurchases. We continued our share repurchases in the fourth quarter as the stock trades at what we believe is a significant discount to our estimate of NAV. Today's share price imputes little to no value of Caret, our liability structure and the CPI lookbacks embedded in the portfolio.

All of these value sources taken together suggest a market implied discount rate on our cash flows that is disconnected from the fundamentals of our portfolio. So to conclude, we have ample liquidity and a valuable long-term balance sheet. We're seeing positive customer engagement across several segments of the market, and we will remain disciplined in how we allocate capital and fund the business to maximize long-term value for our shareholders.

And with that, let me turn it back to Jay.

Jay Sugarman

Thanks, Brett. Right now, AI is driving the economy's demand curve higher, adding to inflationary pressures. But in the medium to long term, this may be as early as 2 to 3 years from now when massive capacity comes online, we believe AI drives the supply curve out to the right and becomes a powerful disinflationary force across a wide range of the economy. That's a part of the cycle we are well positioned for, and we'll continue to work towards.

So with that, let's go ahead and open up for questions.

Operator?

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our first question today is coming from Anthony Paolone with JPMorgan.

質疑応答

Anthony Paolone

My first question is just on the deal activity that you're out there seeing. Can you talk about just how much of it is that there's just not going to be a price that you all could afford with your cost of capital versus a gap in terms of what like a seller would want? I guess maybe a different way to ask it is like what would it have to be -- where would economics have to be for things to clear?

Michael Trachtenberg

Sure. So Tony, our focus is still on beating our benchmarks for unlevered long-term credit, which is in the low 6s. Recent transactions for us have been in the low to mid-7% range. And then if you include CPI, we expect that to translate to the mid-7s to 8% range plus Caret.

Anthony Paolone

Right. But understanding like SAFE's cost of capital right now is tough given where the equity is and where rates are. But are you saying that you can go and execute in the market and get people to sell you their land in the 5s today? Or I guess, like where do deals pencil?

Brett Asnas

Tony, it's Brett. So I'll take the first part of that, which was compared to our cost of capital, how are we thinking about the returns that we're getting on the assets, I would say that from a cost of debt capital standpoint, and as you know, we're levered 2:1. When you start looking at our benchmarks that we have out there where we're able to raise debt capital, there's still accretion there, right? Obviously, base rates are up. Spreads have stayed pretty resilient.

But overall, when we start looking at our maturity profile and laddering in different tenors, you've seen us do everything from 5-year debt to 10-year debt to 30-year debt. The last deal we did back in Q2 was a 30-year step rate deal. So again, comparing to where we've been in the past to today, obviously, elevated rates, but we've been getting that additional yield on the asset side. So from a debt standpoint, there's still accretion. Then from the equity side, obviously, as I mentioned in my remarks, there is a disconnect with our form of valuation and sum of the parts and where we think value should lie. And we're continuing to find ways to get credit for those other value components.

But on the equity side, we certainly, over the course of the quarter and into the fourth quarter have continued to buy back the stock. We feel like there is still that disconnect. And from the equity side, we've continued to find other solutions. As you recall, back in the second quarter, we did a joint venture. We were able to delever through that. So we're continuing to find private capital solutions instead of issuing stock at these levels to continue to find ways to create shareholder value and accretion for our financials.

The other part, I'll pass to you, Michael, you want to talk about the customers and their desire at these levels?

Michael Trachtenberg

Sure. So obviously, it is tougher in a higher interest rate environment to entice customers to want to take the product. And we think that where we've been transacting recently probably is the higher end of the range where we are likely to find market acceptance.

Jay Sugarman

Yes. There's more deals, obviously, Tony, in the mid- to high 4s than it will be in the 5s to low 5s. So it's a trade-off between volume and pricing. And so we're looking at that equation all the time.

Anthony Paolone

Okay. And then just my second one real quick is on the dividend. Do you -- what is your taxable net look like? And is it worth continuing to pay a dividend? Or could that be a source of retained earnings for you to kind of grow?

Brett Asnas

Tony, it's Brett. Yes, we constantly look at our dividend and our policy and meet intermittently and quarterly with our Board. As you know, since the merger back in 2023, a lot of growing out of the cost structure that we had was predicated on growing volume. Obviously, we want to be able to grow origination volume, and we think that accretion will certainly help. Our taxable income is quite low. So again, a lot of the dividend is discretionary. But for the moment, we feel like the tools and the toolkit that we have to continue to climb our way out of that are there.

But time will tell, right? The markets are -- have been volatile. There's obviously been, as we said in our remarks, a 50 to 70 basis point increase here over the last, call it, a couple of months. And we still feel like going forward, with the capital tools that we've been able to build with our investment-grade ratings, the bespoke structures that we've been able to do in the second quarter this year. Over time, we'll continue to evaluate that, but it certainly feels like there are tools to solve it over the longer term.

Operator

Our next question is coming from Caitlin Burrows with Goldman Sachs.

Caitlin Burrows

Maybe just on the origination side. It looks like that was relatively lower in the quarter, and I know we've touched on a couple of topics already. But I guess, would you attribute that to regular quarterly volatility or lumpiness that can come up? Or were the cadence of deals disrupted with volatile interest rates/ the impact that your higher cost of capital had on your kind of interest or ability to do more volume?

Michael Trachtenberg

Sure. So Caitlin, I'd say that the size of our pipeline has remained relatively constant over the last few quarters, and we're still seeing our interest mainly in 3 main categories, one being affordable, second is market rate multifamily recaps and the third is multifamily developments. But like you mentioned, given the recent interest rate volatility that we've been seeing, there's been a lot greater closing uncertainty, and we've seen in all of our deals where we need debt and equity aligned with our ground lease, higher propensity for retrades and repricing, which has just delayed and sometimes disrupted the transactions that we're working on.

Caitlin Burrows

Got it. Okay. And then I guess when you think of that disruption versus buying back stock today, I guess, is there any comment you can give on kind of future plans and how you weigh more origination volume versus buyback volume?

Jay Sugarman

Yes, Caitlin, it's Jay. We have done obviously both, and we think both are viable at different points in time. We've seen a lot of volume in the stock. And so taking advantage of that in a couple of instances. But again, our long-term goal here is to grow the business and establish it as a consistent regular way piece of the capital structure and as many deals and as many customers as possible. So it is a balancing act. As you know, we've said that before and continues to be.

I think right now, we're focused very much on this origination question on how do we break through with our customers as they deal with the uncertainties that they're being faced with. And I think Michael and the team are really focused right now on trying to get them what they need to solve their business problems. So always a topic of conversation internally, but I'd like to see the origination number obviously start back up again.

Operator

Our next question is coming from Rich Anderson with Cantor Fitzgerald.

Richard Anderson

So I had written down the question around recaps before you said it. And I'm wondering, you would think that there will at least be a conversation for a ground lease in some circumstances when an owner is facing a debt expiration. What's your chief competition for situations like that? Is it just basic fee simple, better cost of capital, REITs or whatever?

How are you losing those opportunities, I guess? I'm just trying to understand the cadence of why ground leases wouldn't be at least a little bit more part of the conversation in situations of recapitalization or debt expiration.

Steve Wylder

Sure. Rich, Steve Wylder. I would say, generally speaking, for our customer base, the primary alternative or competition for our capital is still fee simple financing, right? So we've got customers in a volatile rate environment that are evaluating their options vis-a-vis a refinance of existing debt, that could be a sale of an asset, that could be a conventional refinance. But we're, I would say, encouraged by the response and feedback we're getting from groups on the idea of a bifurcation as a way to drive a lower cost of capital.

Richard Anderson

I guess another layer of education for you as you go through this process. Second question is on cost of capital specifically, and maybe Jay or whoever, what about more in the way of dispositions? Are there any arbitrage opportunities where you could sell something that is a better cost of capital and something that you can buy a lower cost of capital? So I'm wondering if dispositions or even more in the way of joint ventures, partial sales type things could start to play an increasing role just to create more volume for Safehold?

Brett Asnas

Rich, it's Brett. I think the transaction that you saw us do in Q2, the joint venture is probably the best route of all worlds, right? Where we're able to -- the deals that we originate over time, able to contribute them into a partnership, have the ability to buy them back in, in the future, still own a lot of the economics, control them. As you heard in the remarks from Jay and Michael, our goal is to continue to scale this platform. We want to grow it. We want to do more deals.

So yes, disposing of assets or doing ventures. Those are all tools that we have to recycle proceeds and delever or keep our leverage in line. But it feels like if there are things to do within the existing portfolio, we'll probably look more like the structure we did back in Q2 as opposed to outright sales.

Richard Anderson

Okay. Last question, as long as I have you there, Brett. Your leverage ticked up a little bit, perhaps influenced by the buyback, not exactly sure, just a 3 basis point increase, but I'm just -- from second quarter. But I'm just curious how your conversations are with the rating agencies. Do they feel any sense of concern around the rate environment and what's happening to the pace of deal activity? Or do you feel you're in a comfort zone there in terms of your ratings?

Brett Asnas

I think we're in a good zone. If you look back historically and think back over the last 2, 3 years, we've ended each year at around 2x. Before that, we ended at 1.9 each year. So we're right in that zone. I think quarter-to-quarter, you might see a little bit of fluctuation. But again, as I've said in the past, it takes about $250 million of deal fundings to take leverage up 0.1x. So it feels like we have some good runway. I think the interesting part and made remarks about this earlier as well, is our liability structure. I think getting folks to really understand that the differentiator for the business is having a maturity profile that's 18 years locked in.

There's no buildup of maturities in any given year. There's no near-term maturities. The nearest term is really our -- of significance is our corporate revolver, which matures in 2029. So I think that's a big difference versus a lot of folks across real estate financials, et cetera, where you think about the amount of debt rolling and the rates at which they need to refinance them, we're not going to have that dilution here over the coming years, which is a big differentiator.

And again, just when you think about 18 years, primarily fixed, very durable laddered maturity profile, as I said, it's about an $800 million mark-to-market value of trying to replicate a 4.4% 18-year maturity profile. So I think that's going to be where we really need to make sure investors understand that math and understand that value component of the business because it really is something different than almost all companies you see out there.

Richard Anderson

Yes. And just really quick last one. What's any latest update on the Midtown office -- Midtown Manhattan office building conversion to resi? I know that you've talked about it in the past, but is there anything new on that front?

Jay Sugarman

I really can't talk about it, still in litigation, but the resi -- the office to resi market is still pretty strong in New York. So hopefully, that will get resolved sometime before -- we also want to stop talking about it, but no progress to report, Rich.

Operator

Our next question is coming from Mitch Germain with Citizens Bank.

Mitch Germain

Last time you guys monetized your Caret units, I think it was around the value that your pool is at today. Is that something that you guys are kind of considering again?

Jay Sugarman

Yes, look, what we've said in the past is we are trying to find ways to create a more liquid mark. Those private transactions take a long time, and they're not in large volumes. So we'd like to get more marks on those. It's tough with Caret. It's really predicated on long-term growth of the business. So I think we've got some short-term goals that will help drive Caret value in the future, but we've got to kind of put the cart before the horse or horse before the cart here and drive growth in Caret and UCA. And then I think you'll see us try to put some of those marks on the board either in a liquid transaction or more private transactions.

Mitch Germain

Got you. And then a couple of the management teams, other sectors have obviously suggested there was a pretty significant move in cap rates in a fairly short period of time given the volatility. Have you guys seen a meaningful change in -- I think Michael talked about re-trades, but have you seen a meaningful change in kind of where you're willing to do deals? And -- or is that kind of situation not as prevalent in the ground lease sector?

Michael Trachtenberg

So Mitch, like I touched on a little bit earlier, we're really focused on trying to beat our benchmarks. And we think that where we're transacting in the kind of 7-plus percent range really is the sweet spot for customers to want to take our capital to be able to try and do it at volume. I think if we were to push materially higher than that level, we would just see a drop-off in demand.

Operator

Our next question is coming from Harsh Hemnani with Green Street.

Harsh Hemnani

I guess just to pick up on that last question, right? A clarifying question, which is, am I hearing correctly that you're saying that roughly the bid that Safehold will originate new ground leases at is still in the roughly 100 basis point range over high-quality, long-duration bonds? And then on the flip side of that, where customers are willing to transact and sell their land is maybe closer to the low to mid-5% initial yield that we saw in the past couple of quarters. Is that a fair way to think about the range of ground lease pricing today?

Michael Trachtenberg

Harsh, I think if I understand your question correctly, yes, we're still trying to beat the benchmarks by about 100 basis points from that low 6s to the low 7s. And when we talk about the 5s, again, that's predicated predominantly on the asset class that we're focused on, which is multifamily. In other asset classes where there may be some incremental yield to go chase, we would be able to price higher. But as we've talked about over the last couple of quarters, we really have leaned into multifamily because we think that the characteristics of that asset class really are best suited to what we're trying to accomplish, but we will certainly entertain other asset classes and think that should we find opportunity in some of those areas, we'll be able to push for some incremental yield.

Harsh Hemnani

Got it. Okay. That's helpful. And then maybe thinking of the balance sheet sort of holistically, right? The debt to equity based on book value is at 2x, so at the higher end of your target. It seems like given where the stock is today, you guys are not the most comfortable issuing equity. I guess the only lever that you've talked about that at least on the balance sheet is the joint venture structure you did a couple of quarters ago. What's the maybe size of the potential deals you could do in that type of structure?

And the reason I ask is with dividend levels where they are, with leverage where it is, without pulling the equity lever, right? It feels like the longer we stay in a world where rates are unchanged, it is not a huge strain, but a nagging strain on Safehold's balance sheet. And I understand the structure you alluded to is maybe a way you can at least make it look like the balance sheet is doing better. But I guess, how long can that be sustained?

Brett Asnas

I mean, Harsh, 2 things. One, our debt to equity is at 2x. 2x is our target. That's what we set out 9.5 years ago. So we're there. It could fluctuate around there a little bit, as I mentioned. As we said, it's $250 million of deal fundings to take it up 0.1x. You've seen how much we funded quarter-by-quarter. I think when you look at our unfunded commits, which on the ground lease side, we have about $120 million that's going to take the next few quarters. It's going to take closing deals that we have in our pipeline, funding that and a few quarters' worth. So there's runway here.

So I think when talking about those structures, the magnitude that we can do and what we're seeking, these are pretty bite-sized, right? They're not -- some other ventures that have occurred here in the past quarters have been several times larger. I think, again, the size of our company and to your point, the size of our shareholder equity and our leverage point, we have quarters of runway here and then the deal sizes that we're talking about are bite-sized and probably more to the tune of what you saw in the second quarter.

And I think that gives us some nice runway to, again, originate deals, go tell the story and really, again, to hit on the key components of value that it seems like the market is not giving us full credit for. I touched on the liabilities. But even on the CPI side, right? We're -- think about all of the CPI lookbacks that we continue to talk about and the deals that we did starting, call it, 2018, 2019, those lookbacks will start to hit over the coming years. When you think about historical CPI over the last 100 years, it's been on an average annual basis, it's been about 3%.

When you think about over the last 50 years, it's been near 3.5%. When you think about over the last 5 years, it's been a little over 4%. So this notion that long-term inflation is closer to 2% has just not panned out when you think about the last 5, 50 or 100 years. And certainly, when you think about what we're going to start clipping in just a couple of years. And by the way, this exists on -- we have inflation protection on over 90% of our leases. It's going to be a material amount of value and driver for the company because not only does it reset the rent, but there's compounding off that higher rent. So we think that's a huge value component that the market is still not appreciating.

But as we get closer here, it certainly feels like when that flows through our P&L and we're getting that cash flow, the market hopefully should give us credit for it. So I think those components are going to help us bring it back to your leverage question. It also helps leverage, right? That's equity that people are not yet giving us credit for that's "in the bank" that's coming to us in the future. So all those components should help give us runway here over the coming quarters and coming years.

Operator

Our next question is coming from Caitlin Burrows with Goldman Sachs.

Caitlin Burrows

I just had a follow-up. It looked like there was a loan extension with Star Holdings at the end of the quarter. So I was wondering if you can discuss that, what drove the extension? How we should think about the earnings impact and if you'll be recognizing a onetime fee in 4Q?

Jay Sugarman

Caitlin. Sure. It was a small amendment, but it was a positive for both companies from a Star perspective or STHO, they were seeking some improved flexibility to optimize their sales processes as they get down to the end and an improved margin of safety by paying down their margin loans. So good things there. And then for SAFE, definitely felt like it improved the credit with that margin loan paydown at Star, and then also picked up some economics, as you said. I think in terms of recognizing those economics, Brett, they'll come in over time.

Brett Asnas

Yes, we just got them at quarter end at 9/30. So it's on the balance sheet and the income is coming.

Operator

Our next question is coming from Ronald Kamdem with Morgan Stanley.

Ronald Kamdem

I jumped on a little late. Just one -- I just had a quick one on the pipeline going back to it. I think we've been through these periods of sort of rate volatility before. And I guess I'm just curious if there were sort of any lesson learned, whether it's the type of product you sort of go after, whether it's markets, like what sort of do you do sort of differently when the vol sort of slows things down? Or are you sort of just reacting to what the sponsors are seeing?

Steve Wylder

Ronald, it's Steve Wylder. Look, I would say our investing and the transactions we're pursuing across all sectors would of course benefit from stability in rates. I think the rapid moves are not good for conviction around transacting across a range of situations. I think that we've been focused in the past couple of quarters you've seen on the affordable side of our business as well. Those developments, tax credit developments are not immune to large movements in rates that can pose a challenge and delay projects.

But the flip side of that is we know the demand for the product is there and that exists largely independent of macro cycles and the rate environment. So developers are still going to work hard to meet that demand. And in a lot of ways, our product is intended to solve the problem that higher rates creates in introducing capital structure gaps. So not ideal, but I think our value proposition depending on the situation, but depending on the sector still holds despite the rate environment.

Ronald Kamdem

Great. And then my quick one, obviously, you can't comment on the Park Hotel stuff, but any update on timing? And just like what -- any update on like the timing of when we should expect anything?

Jay Sugarman

Yes, unfortunately, pretty slow. So I don't have any good news there. It's just the process is grinding away.

Operator

Mr. Hoffmann, we currently have no further questions at this time.

Pearse Hoffmann

Thank you for joining us today. If you do have questions, please feel free to reach out to me directly.

Operator

Thank you. And thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This will conclude today's call. You may disconnect your lines at this time, and have a wonderful day. And we thank you for your participation.