Institutional Investor Presentation

THIRD QUARTER 2019 INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR PRESENTATION Contents Investment Thesis 4 Company Overview 5 Performance Track Record 6 Our Approach and 3Q19 Results 13 Superior Performance During Great Recession 14 Portfolio Diversification 19 Defensive Retail Portfolio 24 Asset Management & Real Estate Operations 29 Investment Strategy 32 Capital Structure & Scalability 39 Dependable Dividends 43 Corporate Responsibility 45 Summary 47 Appendix 48 - Top Industries Overview 49

All data as of September 30, 2019 unless otherwise specified 2 Safe Harbor For Forward-Looking Statements

Statements in this investor presentation that are not strictly historical are "forward-looking" statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, which may cause the company‘s actual future results to differ materially from expected results. These risks include, among others, general economic conditions, domestic and foreign real estate conditions, tenant financial health, the availability of capital to finance planned growth, continued volatility and uncertainty in the credit markets and broader financial markets, property acquisitions and the timing of these acquisitions, charges for property impairments, and the outcome of any legal proceedings to which the company is a party, as described in the company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Consequently, forward-looking statements should be regarded solely as reflections of the company's current operating plans and estimates. Actual operating results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecast in this investor presentation. The company undertakes no obligation to publicly release the results of any revisions to these forward-looking statements that may be made to reflect events or circumstances after the date these statements were made.

3 Investment Thesis Business model offers attractive total return with minimal cash flow volatility

PROVEN TRACK RECORD OF RETURNS 16.8% Compound Average Annual Total Return Since ‘94 NYSE Listing 0.4 Beta vs. S&P 500

PREDICTABLE CASH FLOW Years with Positive Earnings Per Share 22 of 23 Growth(1)

93.8% Adjusted EBITDAre Margin

POTENTIAL GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES

$12 Trillion Corporate-Owned Real Estate in the US and Europe

$30 Billion Average Annual Sourced Acquisition Opportunities Since ‘13

(1) AFFO / Excludes positive earnings from Crest Net Lease, a subsidiary of Realty Income, as earnings do not reflect recurring business operations 4 Realty Income Company Overview Business model has generated above-market returns with below-market volatility since 1994

S&P 500 DIVERSIFIED, HIGH-QUALITY TRACK RECORD OF SAFETY REAL ESTATE COMPANY “NET LEASE” PORTFOLIO AND CONSISTENCY $32B A3 / A- 5,964 9.3 22 OF 23 enterprise value credit ratings by commercial real years weighted years of positive earnings Moody’s and S&P estate properties average remaining per share(1) growth lease term $1.4B 50 annualized base years of operating rent history 83% 49% 5.1% 93.8% of rent generated of rent from median adjusted from retail investment-grade earnings per EBITDAre Member of S&P High-Yield properties rated tenants share(1) growth margin Dividend Aristocrats® index

commercial tenants 1 of 8 U.S. REITs with 274 at least two A3/A- ratings 49 industries 16.8% 0.4 TSR since 1994 beta vs. S&P 500 1 of only 2 REITs U.S. states, Puerto NYSE listing since 1994 NYSE in both categories 49 Rico, and the U.K. listing

(1) AFFO through most recent calendar year/ Excludes earnings from Crest Net Lease, a subsidiary of Realty Income, as earnings do not reflect recurring business operations 5 Consistent Annual Earnings Growth Since NYSE Listing Positive earnings growth(1) in 22 out of 23 years as a public company

Historical Earnings Growth Rates (Median) 17.0% Realty Income (1): 5.1%

Current REITs (2): 3.6%

9.4% 8.1% 6.8% 6.4% 6.6% 6.6% 6.0% 6.0% 6.3% 5.4% 5.1% 5.1% 4.9% 5.1% 4.4% 4.2% 3.2% 3.4% 2.5% 1.6% 0.5%

Compares favorably to REIT median growth rates: -2.1% 2008: -5.1% 2009: -6.9% 2010: -8.1% 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

(1) AFFO / Excludes positive earnings from Crest Net Lease, a subsidiary of Realty Income, as earnings do not reflect recurring business operations (2) FFO / Through 2018 / Includes all REITs currently included in MSCI REIT Index with earnings history since 2000 / Source: SNL 6 Low Earnings Volatility Supports Low Share Price Volatility Since 1994 NYSE listing, “O” annual TSR downside volatility is one of the lowest in the S&P 500

Annual Total Shareholder Return Among S&P 500 Companies: 25% Downside Volatility Since 1994(1)

20%

15% Realty Income’s TSR Downside Volatility Since 1994 NYSE Listing is 3.0%, the lowest of all S&P 500 constituents(2) other than JNJ and ROST

10%

0% S&P 500 1st Decile 2nd Decile 3rd Decile 4th Decile 5th Decile 6th Decile 7th Decile 8th Decile 9th Decile 10th Decile Deciles: Source: Bloomberg (1) “Downside volatility” calculated as the standard deviation of annual total shareholder returns where positive values are assigned “0” value (2) n=274 S&P 500 constituents with trading histories dating to Realty Income’s 1994 NYSE listing 7 Track Record of Favorable Returns to Shareholders Since 1994 NYSE listing, Realty Income shares have outperformed benchmark indices

Compound Average Annual Total Shareholder Return Since 1994

16.8%

10.9% 10.6% 9.9% 9.8%

O Equity REIT Index DJIA Nasdaq S&P 500

8 Attractive Risk/Reward vs. S&P 500 Companies Higher returns and lower volatility than majority of S&P 500 companies since 1994 NYSE listing

35% Realty Income return per unit of market Realty Income return per th 30% unit of riskmarket is riskin the in the 98 98th percentile of allof S&Pall S&P (1): 500500 companies companies(1): : 25% Return: 16.8% Beta:Beta: 0.39 0.4 20% Return: 16.4%

15%

10%

0% Total Return CAGR Return Total

-5%

-10% 2.3 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.0 Beta

(1) n=274 / Excludes companies without trading histories dating to 1994 / Beta measured using monthly frequency Source: Bloomberg 9 Attractive Risk/Reward vs. Blue Chip S&P 500 Equities Historically, more return per unit of risk vs. the 10 largest S&P 500 constituents and S&P 500 REITs

25% AAPL

20% O MSFT HD 15% JNJ JPM PG 10% REITs WMT S&P 500 T XOM 5% BAC Top 10 largest S&P 500 constituents 0% 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0

20% ESS O PSA 15% AVB SPG FRT AIV VNO EQR MAA WELL UDR MAC 10% REG VTR HST HCP WY KIM

5% Average Annual Total Shareholder Return Shareholder Total Annual Average S&P 500 REIT Peers 0% 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 Beta Excludes companies without trading histories since 10/18/1994 | Constituents plotted include S&P 500 and FTSE NAREIT US Equity REIT Index | Beta measured using monthly frequency Source: Bloomberg 10 Consistency: Steady Portfolio, Solid Fundamentals Focus on quality underwriting and real estate supports predictable cash flow generation

Consistent Occupancy Levels, Never Below 96%

Tenets of Consistency:

˃ Careful underwriting at acquisition ˃ Solid retail store performance ˃ Strong underlying real estate quality ˃ Healthy tenant industries Steady Same-Store Rent Growth ˃ Prudent disposition activity 1.8% 1.7% 1.6% ˃ Proactive management of rollovers 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.4%1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.3%1.3% 1.5% 1.4% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0% 0.9% 0.8% 1.2% ✓ Annual same-store rent growth run rate of ~1.0% 0.4% ✓ Long lease terms limit annual volatility

11 Snapshot vs. S&P 500 REIT Peers Superior stability: Favorable occupancy, dividend growth, credit rating and total return metrics

Portfolio Occupancy Dividend Growth(1) 98.3% 96.6% 8% 93.7% 91.2% 4.5% 2.9%

0% Tenets of Consistency: Historical Median Lowest Year-End % of Years w/ Negative Dividend CAGR Growth O S&P 500 REIT Median O S&P 500 REIT Median Avg. Credit Rating (S&P/Moody’s) # of Years with TSR < -10%(1)

500%A / A2 8 7 400%A- / A3 6 5 BBB+ 300%/ Baa1 4 3 BBB 200%/ Baa2 2 1 BBB-100%/ Baa3 0 0 ● ● S&P10 500 REIT Peer20 30 ● ● S&P 500 REIT Peer

Sources: SNL, Bloomberg | Excludes specialty REITs (i.e. infrastructure, timber, information services) (1) Since 1995. Excludes REITs with fewer years of history than Realty Income 12 Our Approach and 3Q19 Results

Acquire well-located commercial properties 1 ✓ ~$412 million in acquisitions

Remain disciplined in our acquisition underwriting 2 ✓ Acquired < 3% of sourced volume

Execute long-term net lease agreements 3 ✓ Recaptured 101.5% of expiring rent

Actively manage portfolio to maximize value 4 ✓ Ended quarter at 98.3% occupancy

Maintain a conservative balance sheet 5 ✓ Ended quarter with Net Debt/Adjusted EBITDAre ratio of 5.0x

Grow per share earnings and dividends ✓ AFFO/sh growth: +2.5% | Dividend/sh growth: +3.0%

13 SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE DURING GREAT RECESSION Superior Earnings Growth and TSR During Great Recession 1 of 2 S&P 500 REITs with positive earnings growth, dividend growth, and TSR during Great Recession

2007-2009 Earnings CAGR(1) 2007-2009 Dividend Growth 2007-2009 Total Return 2.1% 14.7% 9.0%

-2.3% -20.6% -28.3% (2) Realty Income S&P 500 REITs

1 of only 11 S&P 500 REITs with 1 of only 9 S&P 500 REITs without a 1 of only 5 S&P 500 REITs with positive earnings growth dividend cut positive total shareholder return

(1) FFO/sh or operating FFO/sh (if available) used as proxy for earnings growth (2) Median of S&P 500 REITs, excludes non-property REITs AMT, CCI, WY, EQIX, IRM, PCL All data is for the period between 1/1/2007 and 12/31/2009 Source: Bloomberg, SNL 15 NAV Premium Persisted Through Great Recession Cost of capital advantage (measured by premium to NAV) remained stable during recession

Historical Premium / (Discount) to NAV

Realty Income’s median NAV premium was 10% during the downturn (1 of only 6 S&P 500 REITs trading at a premium to NAV during this time period) 45%

30%

15%

-15%

-30%

-45% Jan-07 Jun-07 Nov-07 Apr-08 Sep-08 Feb-09 Jul-09 Dec-09

(1) Realty Income S&P 500 REITs

(1) Median premium / (discount) of S&P 500 REITs, excludes non-property REITs AMT, CCI, WY, EQIX, IRM

Source: SNL 16 Stable Leverage and Coverage Ratios During Downturn Lower credit metric volatility during Great Recession relative to other blue-chip REITs

Leverage(1) Ratio Range (2007-2009)

Realty Income 5.2x 0.7x 5.9x Tighter metric S&P 500 REIT 3.1x Median (2) 5.7x 8.8x ranges reflect:

Min Leverage Spread Max Leverage 1) Inherently stable net lease business model

Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio Range (2007-2009) 2) Disciplined capital allocation Realty Income 2.5x 0.5x 3.0x 3) Responsible balance sheet management S&P 500 REIT Median (2) 2.2x 0.9x 3.1x

Min FCCR Spread Max FCCR

(1) Calculated using year-end debt and preferred equity for leverage, and annual EBITDA (2) Median of maximum and minimum ratios of S&P 500 REITs, excludes non-property REITs AMT, CCI, WY, EQIX, IRM, PCL

Source: SNL 17 Superior Relative Volatility Metrics vs. A-Rated REITs During Recession 2007 – 2009 relative rankings Rank

0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.6% 0.1x 0% 0.1% 1

0.7% 0.5% 0.6% 0.8% 0.3x 1.2% 0.2% 2

3.1% 1.1% 3.8% 1.3% 0.5x 1.5% 0.3% 3

3.7% 1.4% 4.3% 2.0% 1.5x 2.0% 0.3% 4

4.0% 1.7% 5.7% 2.2% 2.2x 2.2% 0.7% 5

4.2% 1.7% 9.7% 7.4% 2.2x 2.8% 3.4% 6

9.7% 9.4% 31.9% 20.3% 3.3x 4.9% N/A(3) 7 More Volatile Less Volatile Less Volatile More

Rental Revenue(1) Gross Margin(1) EBITDA(1) EBITDA Margin(1) Debt/EBITDA(2) Unsecured/Total Debt(1) Occupancy Rate(1)

Realty Income; Other colored ovals represent REITs that currently have at least two A-/A3 credit ratings or better (1) Downside Volatility calculated as the standard deviation around zero of quarterly percentage changes in each metric shown, where positive changes are replaced with zero (2) Upside Volatility calculated as the standard deviation around zero of quarterly percentage changes, where negative changes are replaced with zero (3) Company did not report consolidated quarterly portfolio occupancy during 2007-2009 18 Source: SNL PORTFOLIO DIVERSIFICATION Portfolio Diversification: Tenant Diverse tenant roster, investment grade concentration reduces overall portfolio risk

5.7% 2.1% TOP 20 TENANTS REPRESENT 5.1% 2.0%

4.4% 1.9% 54.0% 3.8% 1.8%

3.6% 1.7%

Of annualized rental revenue 3.2% 1.7%

3.1% 1.5% 3.1% 1.5% 11 12 2.8% 1.4% Different Investment grade industries rated tenants

2.3% 1.3%

Orange represents investment grade tenants that are defined as tenants with a credit rating of Baa3/BBB- or higher from one of the three major rating agencies (Moody’s/S&P/Fitch). 49% of our annualized rental revenue is generated from properties leased to investment grade tenants, including approximately 8% from properties leased to subsidiaries of investment grade companies. 20 Portfolio Diversification: Industry Exposure to 49 industries enhances predictability of cash flow (See Appendix for Industry Theses) Exposure to defensive industries: 96% of total portfolio rent is protected against retail e-commerce threats and economic downturns

Non-Discretionary

❶Convenience Stores: 11.6% Service-Oriented ❹ Dollar Stores : 7.1% ❼ Quick-Service Restaurants: 6.1% Service-oriented Non-discretionary, Low price point Low price point, Service-oriented Non-Discretionary, Low Price Point 79% of Total Rent:

Retail with at least one of the following components: Non-Discretionary ❷ Drug Stores: 8.9% ❺ Grocery: 6.9%(1) (Low cash flow volatility) Non-discretionary N/A (Non-Retail Exposure Non-discretionary Low Price-Point (Counter-cyclical) Non-Discretionary Service-Oriented Service-Oriented (E-commerce resilient)

Low Price Point 17% Non-retail ❸ Health & Fitness: 7.4% ❻ Theaters: 6.7% (E-commerce resilient) Non-discretionary, Service-oriented Low price point, Service-oriented 4% Other

(1) Includes grocery stores in the U.S. and the U.K., which represent 5.0% and 1.9% of rental revenue for the quarter ended 9/30/2019, respectively 21 Portfolio Diversification: Property Type Core exposure in retail and industrial single-tenant freestanding net lease properties

RETAIL (82.7%) INDUSTRIAL (11.6%) Number of Properties: 5,787 Number of Properties: 120 Average Leasable Square Feet: 11,900 Average Leasable Square Feet: 238,000 Percentage of Rental Revenue Percentage of Rental Revenue from Investment Grade Tenants: 43.9% from Investment Grade Tenants: 80.0%

OFFICE (3.8%) AGRICULTURE (1.9%)(1) Number of Properties: 42 Number of Properties: 15 Average Leasable Square Feet: 73,600 Average Leasable Square Feet: 12,300 Percentage of Rental Revenue Percentage of Rental Revenue from Investment Grade Tenants: 86.0% from Investment Grade Tenants: -

(1) Excludes 3,300 acres of leased land categorized as agriculture at September 30, 2019 22 Portfolio Diversification: Geography Balanced presence in 49 states, Puerto Rico and the United Kingdom

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 1.1 3.0 4.4 <1 <1 2.1 <1 <1 2.2 <1 <1 3.1 1.6 1.2 4.9 <1 <1 <1 6.1 2.6 <1 1.5 <1 1.7 2.9 8.8 1.6 2.6 1.4 3.0 3.2 Top 6 States 2.1 2.1 <1 <1 2.3 % of Rental Revenue 1.5 1.7 3.9 Texas 11.0% California 8.8% 11.0 1.6 Illinois 6.1% <1 5.4 Florida 5.4% Ohio 4.9% New York 4.4% Puerto Rico <1

United Kingdom 1.9

Figures represents percentage of rental revenue 23 DEFENSIVE RETAIL PORTFOLIO Top 20 Tenants Highly Insulated from Changing Consumer Behavior All top 20 tenants fall into at least one category (Service, Non-Discretionary, Low Price Point Retail or Non-Retail)

Service / Experiential Non-Discretionary

Non-Retail

Low Price Point

Walmart represented by Neighborhood Markets and Sam’s Club 25 Top Tenant Exposure: 2009 vs. Today Less cyclicality and superior credit and diversification vs. prior downturn

Bold tenants represent investment-grade rated credit TOP 15 TENANTS AS OF YE 2009 TOP 15 TENANTS AS OF 3Q 2019

Tenant Industry % of Rent Tenant Industry % of Rent

Hometown Buffet Casual Dining 6.0% Walgreens Drug Stores 5.7% Kerasotes Showplace Theatres 5.3% 7-Eleven Convenience Stores 5.1% Theatres FedEx (Non-Retail) Transportation 4.4% L.A. Fitness Health & Fitness 5.3% Dollar General Dollar Stores 3.8% The Pantry Convenience Stores 4.3% LA Fitness Health & Fitness 3.6% Friendly’s Casual Dining 4.1% AMC Theaters Theaters 3.2% Rite Aid Drug Stores 3.4% Dollar Tree / Family Dollar Dollar Stores 3.1% La Petite Academy Child Care 3.3%

TBC Corporation Auto Tire Services 3.2% Regal Cinemas Theaters 3.1%

Boston Market QSR 3.1% Walmart / Sam’s Club Grocery / Wholesale 2.8%

Couche-Tard / Circle K Convenience Stores 3.0% LifeTime Fitness Health & Fitness 2.3%

NPC / Pizza Hut QSR 2.6% Circle K / Couche-Tard Convenience Stores 2.1%

FreedomRoads / Camping Sainsbury’s Grocery 2.0% Sporting Goods 2.6% World BJ’s Wholesale Clubs Wholesale Clubs 1.9% KinderCare Child Care 2.5% Treasury Wine Estates Beverages 1.8% Regal Cinemas Theatres 2.3% (Non-Retail)

Sports Authority Sporting Goods 2.0% CVS Pharmacy Drug Stores 1.7% Total % of Rent - Top 15 Tenants 53.0% Total % of Rent - Top 15 Tenants 46.6% Investment Grade % - Top 15 Tenants 3.2% Investment Grade % - Top 15 Tenants 28.7% #1 Industry – Restaurants 21.3% #1 Industry – Convenience Stores 11.6% #2 Industry – Convenience Stores 17.0% #2 Industry – Drug Stores 8.9%

26 Differentiated Business Model from “Traditional” Retail REITs Lease structure and growth drivers support predictable revenue stream relative to other forms of retail real estate

Unique “net lease” structure drives lower cash flow volatility Shopping Centers and Malls Initial Length of Lease 15+ Years < 10 Years Remaining Avg Term ~ 10 Years ~ 5-7 Years Responsibility for Property Expenses Tenant Landlord Gross Margin > 98% ~ 75% Volatility of Rental Revenue Low Modest / High Maintenance Capital Expenditures Low Modest / High Reliance on Anchor Tenant(s) None High Average Retail Property Size / Fungibility 12k sf / High 150k–850k sf / Low

Shopping Centers Ample external growth opportunities and Malls Target Markets Many Few External Acquisition Opportunities High Low Institutional Buyer Competition Modest High

Red retailers represent businesses lacking either a non-discretionary, low price point, and / or service-oriented component 28 ASSET MANAGEMENT & REAL ESTATE OPERATIONS Active Real Estate Management: Re-leasing Experience Since 1996, Realty Income has achieved 100.4% recapture of prior rent on re-leasing activity

Recapture vs. Prior Rent: (All Re-Leasing Activity)

1996 - 2005 95.9% 2006 - 2012 95.6% 2013 - Present 102.2% 3,127 Lease Expirations since 1996

2,701 426 Re-Leased at 100.4% rent recapture(1) Sold and proceeds reinvested into higher quality assets

(1) Reflects cash rent recapture inclusive of tenant improvement spend (immaterial) 30 Actively-Managed Real Estate Portfolio Proven track record of value creation, cash flow preservation and risk mitigation

Asset Management & Healthy Leasing Results Real Estate Operations

Blended rent recapture ✓ Largest department in the company 93.5% rate of 102.1% on expired leases ✓ Distinct management verticals ✓ Retail YTD 2019 ✓ Non-Retail Renewal / New Lease Split % Re-leased to Existing Tenants % Re-leased to New Tenants ✓ Leasing & dispositions Favorable Returns on Dispositions ✓ Maximizing value of real estate 12.1% 11.6% 11.5% 9.9% 8.5% 8.6% 7.6% 8.1% ✓ Strategic and opportunistic 6.9% 7.3% 7.1% 7.1% dispositions

✓ Value-creating development 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 YTD 2019 Cap Rate on Occupied Dispositions ✓ Risk mitigation Unlevered IRR on All Dispositions

31 INVESTMENT STRATEGY Investment Strategy: Key Considerations Cost of capital advantage, size, track record represent competitive advantage

COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES VS. NET LEASE PEERS

LOWEST COST OF CAPITAL SIZE AND TRACK RECORD

1 Supports investment selectivity 1 Ability to buy “wholesale” (at a discount) without creating tenant concentration issues

Drives faster earnings growth 2 (wider margins) 2 Access to liquidity ($3 billion multi-currency revolver)

Critical in industry reliant on Relationships developed since 1969 3 external growth 3

33 Investment Strategy: Aim to Exceed Long-Term WACC WACC viewpoint balances near-term earnings per share growth with long-term value accretion

Long-term Weighted Average Cost of Capital “Nominal” 1st-Year Weighted Average Cost of Capital

• Drives investment decision- • Long-term WACC is the • Used to measure initial • Spread on short-term WACC making at the property level hurdle rate (no spread (year one) earnings required to generate required) for acquisitions accretion accretion • Considers required “growth” component of • Focus on higher long-term • Higher stock price (lower • Unwilling to sacrifice quality equity returns IRR discourages risk-taking cost) supports faster growth to generate wider spreads

Key Assumptions & Calculation – Long-Term Cost of Equity Key Assumptions & Calculation – Nominal 1st-Year WACC

Historical Beta (vs. S&P 500) 0.36 59% Equity: AFFO Yield (Midpoint of 2019 guidance) 4.1%

Assumed long-term 10-year U.S. yield 4.0% 6% Free Cash Flow(1): Free cash flow reinvested 0%

Equity market risk premium 4.7% 35% Debt: 10-year, fixed-rate unsecured 2.9%

Long-Term Cost of Equity (CAPM methodology) 5.7% Nominal 1st-Year WACC 3.4%

Dividend yield 3.4%

Compound average annual dividend growth since 1994 listing 4.5%

Long-Term Cost of Equity (Yield + Growth methodology) 7.9%

Long-Term Cost of Equity (Average of two methodologies) 6.8%

Key Assumptions & Calculation – Long-Term WACC LOW NOMINAL WACC LONG-TERM WACC

65% Weight: Long-Term cost of equity 6.8% supports ability to spread invest considers growth requirements with high-quality acquisitions of equity and supports focus on 35% Weight: Cost of debt (10-year, fixed-rate unsecured) 2.9% residual value of acquisitions Long-Term WACC 5.4%

Cost of capital information uses illustrative assumptions only (as of 10/25/2019) (1) 6% FCF weight assumes current acquisition guidance ($3.375 billion) 34 Investment Strategy: Benefits of Low Cost of Capital Low cost of capital is the most important competitive advantage in the net lease industry

8% Higher Lower Reduces need to pursue lower- stock cost of quality, higher-yielding investments 7% price capital to generate growth 6.7% 6.3% 5.9% 6% 5.5% 5.1% Higher 5% Wider 4.7% growth spreads 4.3% rate 3.9% 4% 3.5% 3.1% 3% 2.7% 2.3% 1.9% 2% 1.5% Assumptions and Footnotes:

1) Assumes $3.375 billion in acquisition volume

Annualized AFFO/sh Growth AFFO/sh Annualized 1% 2) Assumes ratable timing of acquisitions over next 12 months 3) Growth based on TTM AFFO/sh ($3.26/sh) 4) Growth rates include organic same-store rent growth of ~1.0% (unlevered)

0 bps 0

50 bps 50 25 bps 25 bps 75

100 bps100 bps125 bps150 bps175 bps200 bps225 bps250 bps275 bps300 bps325 Investment Spread vs. Nominal 1st-Year WACC

Cost of capital information uses illustrative assumptions only 35 Investment Strategy: Utilizing Low Cost of Capital Advantage Low cost of capital allows Realty Income to acquire the highest quality assets in the net lease industry

8.0% “High Yield” Investment Characteristics (higher cap rates): Higher cost of capital forces companies to invest in riskier investment opportunities to • Above-market rents / financially-engineered cap rates derive 150 bps of spread • Poor credit or limited credit availability and track record 7.5% • Thin industry-specific rent coverage • Poor real estate (low residual value) • Short lease terms 7.0% • Volatile industries

6.5% “High Quality” Investment Characteristics (lower cap rates):

6.0% • At or below-market rents • Strong credit / proven sponsors & tenants • Above-average rent coverage • Flexible alternative use 5.5% Lower cost of capital allows Realty • Long lease terms Income to invest in higher quality • Stable industries opportunities to derive the same spread

5.0%

Acquisition Cap Rate to Achieve 150 150 bps Spreads Achieve to Rate AcquisitionCap

4.00% 4.25% 4.50% 4.75% 5.00% 5.25% 5.50% 5.75% 6.00% 6.25% Nominal 1st-Year WACC

Cost of capital information uses illustrative assumptions only 36 Investment Strategy: The Importance of Market Rents Realty Income avoids lease structures with above-market rents, which can inflate initial cap rates

Illustrative Sale-Leaseback Example Assumptions Annual EBITDAR (000s) $8,500 Replacement cost (psf) $200

Total square footage (000s) 175 Market rent (psf) $15

Assuming identical real estate portfolio, consider two different lease structure scenarios….

Higher Risk & Cap Rate Lower Risk & Cap Rate Buyer and Seller Motivations: 1. Maximize proceeds for seller 1. Maximize EBITDAR rent coverage 2. Maximize cap rate for buyer 2. Match purchase price w/ replacement cost Implied Sale Price (000s) $42,000 $35,000 Lower cap rates often imply: Implied Cap Rate 7.5% 6.5% Implied Rent (000s) $3,150 ✓ Lower purchase price $2,267 ✓ Lower risk Implied Rent (psf) $18.00 $12.95 ✓ Higher residual value Premium/(Discount) to Market Rent 20% ✓ Higher IRR (14%) Implied EBITDAR rent coverage 2.7x 3.75x Implied premium to replacement cost 20% 0%

• Above-market rents • Below-market rents • Lower rent coverage Lower long- • Higher rent coverage Higher long- Results • Lower residual value term IRR • Higher residual value term IRR • Higher default risk • Lower default risk

37 Investment Strategy: Disciplined Execution Consistent, selective underwriting philosophy on strong sourced volume

Key Metrics Since 2010 (Excluding $3.2 billion ARCT transaction):

$14.3 billion $6.4 billion 52% 84% in property-level acquisition volume in non-investment grade of volume leased to of volume associated with retail acquisitions Investment grade tenants retail properties

2013 YTD 2010 2011 2012 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 (Ex-ARCT) 2019

Investment Volume $714 mil $1.02 bil $1.16 bil $1.51 bil $1.40 bil $1.26 bil $1.86 bil $1.52 bil $1.80 bil $2.03 bil

# of Properties 186 164 423 459 507 286 505 303 764 241

Initial Avg. Cap Rate 7.9% 7.8% 7.2% 7.1% 7.1% 6.6% 6.3% 6.4% 6.4% 6.2%

Initial Avg. Lease Term 15.7 13.4 14.6 14.0 12.8 16.5 14.7 14.4 14.8 15.5 (yrs)

% Investment Grade 46% 40% 64% 65% 66% 46% 64% 48% 59% 25%

% Retail 57% 60% 78% 84% 86% 87% 86% 95% 96% 90%

Sourced Volume $6 bil $13 bil $17 bil $39 bil $24 bil $32 bil $28 bil $30 bil $32 bil $45 bil

Selectivity 12% 8% 7% 4% 6% 4% 7% 5% 6% 4%

Relationship Driven 76% 96% 78% 66% 86% 94% 81% 88% 89% 84%

Low selectivity metrics reflect robust opportunity set, disciplined investment parameters, and cost of capital advantage 38 CAPITAL STRUCTURE & SCALABILITY Conservative Capital Structure Modest leverage, low cost of capital, ample liquidity provides financial flexibility

Total Enterprise Value: $31.9 billion

Common Stock, 79% Unsecured Notes: $6.3 billion

Net Debt, Unsecured Term Loans: $500 million 19% Market Cap: 21% $25.0 billion Mortgages: $279 million

Revolving Credit Facility: -- 2% 1%

Unsecured Debt Ratings: Moody’s A3 | S&P A- | Fitch BBB+

Debt amounts reflect principal value / Numbers may not foot due to rounding 40 Well-Laddered Debt Maturity Schedule Limited re-financing and variable interest rate risk throughout debt maturity schedule

Debt Profile 7.9 Years 3.9% $1,700 Unsecured Weighted Average Years Weighted Average 96% Until Maturity Interest Rate(1) Unsecured Secured ₤(2)

$1,059 Fixed Rate 100% $756 Fixed Variable $650 Rate $600 $600 $550 $502

$331 $317 Revolver $3B Availability Available on Revolver Revolver Balance 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029+

Unsecured Notes Mortgages Term Loan GBP Denominated Notes

All amounts are in millions unless stated otherwise (1) Weighted average interest rates reflect variable-to-fixed interest rate swaps on term loans as of 9/30/2019 (2) GBP denominated private placement of ₤315 million, which approximates $387.1 million using relevant conversion rate at quarter end 41 Scalability as a Competitive Advantage Leaders in the net lease industry in efficiency and ability to buy in bulk

Larger Size Drives Superior Overhead Efficiency Larger Size Provides Growth Optionality (1) G&A as % of Rental Revenue in millions Transaction Size & Impact(2) to Rent Concentration

Current Net Lease Peer Median: 9.6% Current 5.8% Rent $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $1,000 4.8% $200 3% 6% 9% 12% 14% 25%

$400 2% 3% 5% 6% 8% 14%

Adjusted EBITDAre Margin $600 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 10% 93.8% 92.4% $800 1% 2% 2% 3% 4% 8% Current Net Lease Peer Median: 88.1% $1,000 1% 1% 2% 3% 3% 6%

$1,400 <1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 4% G&A as % of Gross RE Book Value (bps) 64 bps Size allows Realty Income to pursue large sale- 36 bps leaseback transactions without compromising prudent Current Net Lease Peer Median: 74 bps tenant and industry diversification metrics

(2) Assumes 6.5% cap rate

(1) 2018 G&A excludes $18.7 million severance to former CEO paid in 4Q18 | percentage of rental revenue calculation excludes tenant reimbursements 42 DEPENDABLE DIVIDENDS Dependable Dividends That Grow Over Time Steady dividend track record supported by inherently stable business model, disciplined execution

Strong Dividend Track Record

88 consecutive quarterly increases $2.72 $2.65 103 total increases since 1994 NYSE listing $2.53 82% AFFO payout (based on midpoint of 2019 AFFO guidance) $2.39 $2.27 $2.19 4.5% compound average annualized growth rate since NYSE listing $2.15 One of only five REITs included in S&P High Yield Dividend Aristocrats® index $1.77 $1.74 $1.71 $1.72 $1.66 $1.56 $1.44 $1.35 $1.24 $1.15 $1.18 $1.09 $1.12 $1.04 $0.98 $0.90 $0.91 $0.93 $0.95

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 YTD

Data is as of October 2019 dividend declaration (annualized) 44 CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY Corporate Responsibility Realty Income strives to lead the net lease industry in Environmental, Social, and Governance initiatives Overview Focus

• We remain committed to sustainable • HQ energy efficiency, waste business practices in our day-to-day diversion, and water efficiency activities by encouraging a culture of programs environmental responsibility by regularly • Tenant engagement with top 20 engaging our employees and our local tenants (over 50% of revenue) to discuss sustainable operations VALUES community • Internal “Green Team" led • As a leader in the net lease sector, we work sustainability initiatives and with our tenants to promote environmental education to engage employees responsibility at the properties we own and community

• We are committed to providing a positive • Comprehensive employee and engaging work environment for our health and retirement benefits team members, with best-in-class training, development, and opportunities for growth • Employee engagement and Environmental Social “O”verall wellbeing programs Responsibility Responsibility • Dedication to employee well-being and satisfaction • “Dollars for Doers” and employee matching gift • We believe that giving back to our program community is an extension of our mission to improve the lives of our shareholders, our • Dedicated San Diego Habitat S employees, and their families for Humanity volunteer day Corporate Governance • Shareholder Engagement • We believe nothing is more important than a company’s reputation for integrity and • Board refreshment process serving as a responsible fiduciary for its focusing on diversity and shareholders expertise • We are committed to managing the • Board oversight of company for the benefit of our shareholders environmental, social, and and are focused on maintaining good governance matters corporate governance • Enterprise Risk Management

To learn more, visit https://www.realtyincome.com/corporate-responsibility 46 Summary

˃ Long term-focused business strategy ˃ Diversified and actively managed portfolio ˃ Proven and disciplined relationship-driven acquisition strategy ˃ Conservative capital structure able to withstand economic volatility ˃ Precedent of outperforming S&P 500 and REITs since 1994 listing ˃ Attractive risk/reward vs. other REITs and blue chip equities ˃ Dependable monthly dividends with long track record of growth

47 APPENDIX

48 TOP INDUSTRIES OVERVIEW Convenience Stores (11.6% of Rent) Quality real estate locations with strong store-level performance

Industry Considerations

(1) Strong performance independent of gas sales: ~70% of inside sales are generated by customers not buying gas(1)

(2) Larger-format stores provide stability: Larger format stores (average size ~3,200 sf) allow for increased food options which carry higher margins

(3) Electric vehicles’ market penetration presents minimal risk • EVs = Only 1% of all vehicles in US and 2% of new sales(2) • Cost, limited infrastructure/range present headwinds

In-Store Same Store Sales: 16 Consecutive Convenience Store Gross Profit(3) Years of Positive Same-Store Sales Growth(3) In-Store (5.7% CAGR since 2003) Fuel (4.4% CAGR since 2003) 13.2% Recession ~70% of gross profit generated from inside sales which is generally not $36.9 impacted by gasoline demand 8.2% $26.5 6.4% 6.7% $24.8 5.8% 4.9% 4.5% 3.8% $19.4 3.2% 3.6% 3.2% 3.4% $82.1 2.2% 2.5% 2.3% $67.0 1.7% $55.7 $35.8

2003 2008 2013 2018

(1) Realty Income estimates based on industry component data (2) US Energy Information Administration, InsideEVs 50 (3) In billions. Source: National Association of Convenience Stores Drug Stores (8.9% of Rent) Industry tailwinds, high barriers to entry, key real estate presence

Δ in 30-day Prescriptions by Pharmacy Format (2012 – 2017)(1) 21% 21% 12% 3%

(33%) Chain Mass Supermarkets Independent Mail Drugstores Merchants Pharmacies Pharmacies Industry Considerations Walgreens: 25 of 26 Quarters of Positive (1) Consumer preference skews towards physical drug stores: Same-Store Pharmacy Sales Growth(2) Prescription volumes have shifted away from mail order

(2) Positive brick-and-mortar fundamentals: 25 of 26 quarters 9.7% 9.3% (2) 9.1% of positive pharmacy SS sales growth for Walgreens 8.1% 9.3% 7.2% 7.8% 7.4% (3) High barriers to entry: Difficult for new entrants to achieve 6.4% 6.3% 6.0% 6.0% 5.8% 5.1% necessary scale and PBM partnerships to compete on price 5.8% 4.2% 5.0% 5.6% 5.4%

(4) Bundled service partnerships and vertical integration 3.7% 2.8% 1.9% among incumbents insulates industry from outside threats 2.0% 1.3% 2.0% (5) Real estate presence matters: Estimated 80% of U.S. 0.0%

population lives within 5-mile radius of Walgreens or CVS(2)

3Q13 4Q13 1Q14 2Q14 3Q14 4Q14 1Q15 2Q15 3Q15 4Q15 1Q16 2Q16 3Q16 4Q16 1Q17 2Q17 3Q17 4Q17 1Q18 2Q18 3Q18 4Q18 1Q19 2Q19 3Q19 4Q19

(1) Source: Pembroke Consulting (2) Source: Company Filings 51 Health & Fitness (7.4% of Rent) E-commerce resilient supported by favorable demographic trends

Industry Considerations

(1) Favorable consumer trends and demographic tailwinds: Growing market as consumers increasingly value health / Baby Boomer age group has the highest attendance frequency

(2) E-Commerce resilient: Service-oriented business model makes the core real estate essential to operations

(3) Attractive margin of safety, top operators: Average CFC of portfolio(1) allows for 40% sales drop to breakeven. Top exposure is with #1 operator (L.A. Fitness) and premium provider that performed well during recession (LifeTime Fitness)

Illustrative Gym Rent Coverage Sensitivity LifeTime Fitness: Same-Center Revenue Growth Thru Downturn(2)

For stores open 13 months or longer

7.7% 7.3% 6.1% 5.0% 5.1% 4.3% 4.0% 2.8%

Modest revenue volatility during economic downturns provides (3.1%) ample margin of safety to landlord 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

(1) Average CFC of portfolio based on locations that report sales (2) Life Time Fitness 10-K 52 Dollar Stores (7.1% of Rent) Counter-cyclical protection and E-commerce resilient

Dollar General: 29 Consecutive Years of Positive Same-Store Sales Growth

9.5% Counter-cyclical sales growth trends supports portfolio during recessionary periods 7.3% 9.0%

6.0% 5.7% 4.9% 4.7% 4.0% 3.3% 3.2% 3.3% 2.8% 2.7% 3.2% 2.8% 2.0% 2.1% 0.9%

0.9%

2013 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Dollar Tree / Family Dollar: 13 Consecutive Years Industry Considerations of Positive Same-Store Sales Growth (1) Consistent long-term performance: 29 and 13 consecutive years of positive same-store sales growth for Dollar General and Recession Dollar Tree / Family Dollar, respectively 7.2% 6.3% 5.7% 6.0% (2) E-commerce resilient: 4.6% • 75% of US population lives within 5 miles of a Dollar General 4.1% 4.3% 3.4% • Average basket size is $11 - $12 2.9% • Dollar store consumers primarily pay with cash 2.7% 2.4% 1.8% 1.9% 2.1% 1.7% 1.0% 0.5% (3) Well-performing locations: Average CFC of dollar store 0.1%

portfolio is above total portfolio average -0.8%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Source: Company Filings 53 Grocery (6.9% of Rent) Exposure to top operators in a largely e-commerce resistant industry

U.S. Grocery E-Commerce Market Share Remains Modest(2) 64%

35% 24% 20% 9% 3%

Media Consumer Sporting Apparel Home Grocery Electronics Goods Goods Industry Considerations U.S. Grocery Market Share(2) (1) Stable, necessity-based industry: Total food expenditure 39% accounts for 12.3% of U.S. average spending and has been Realty Income’s top two U.S. growing at 3% annually for the past decade(1) grocery tenants control over 1/3 of U.S. grocery market 25% (2) Resiliency to Economic Downturns: Flat Food At Home share expenditure during Great Recession (2009)(1)

(3) Partnership with top operators: 13% • Top three tenants (Walmart Neighborhood Markets, 8% Sainsbury’s and Kroger) are leading operators with 7% 6% differentiated business models 2%

Walmart Kroger Costco Albertsons Ahold Amazon Other

(1) U.S. Census Bureau 54 (2) Wall Street Research, Company filings Grocery: Overview of the U.K. Grocery Industry Traditional grocery retailers remain the core distribution channel and dominate online sales 2018 U.K. Grocery Sales by Channel(1)

Traditional grocery retail formats 100 £89 (supermarkets & hypermarkets) account for ~55% of sales and an 80 estimated 80%+ of profits of U.K. 60 grocery store market(2)

£40 £bn 40 £23 £16 20 £11 £10

0 Supermarkets Convenience Discounters Hypermarkets Online Other

Industry Considerations U.K. Grocery Market Share(1)(2) (4) 64% (1) Defensive, non-discretionary industry: U.K. grocery sales have been growing consistently over the past 15 years in both nominal terms (+2.5% CAGR) and as a percentage of retail market (from 47% to 55% of total retail sales)(3) (2) Resiliency to e-commerce: U.K. online grocery currently 19% accounts for just 6% of the market and is expected to plateau at around 8%(2) 8% 7% 1% (3) Partnership with top operator: • Sainsbury’s is a “Blue Chip” grocery operator with seasoned and highly-regarded management team • Quality product, excellent locations and differentiated assortment are hallmarks of the Sainsbury's brand

(1) Source: IGD estimates Big 4 Discounters Premium Convenience "Pure play" online (2) Source: IGD estimates, Knight Frank 2018 (3) Passport Euromonitor International 55 (4) Big 4 market share includes all formats (supermarkets, hypermarkets, c-stores and online) Theaters (6.7% of Rent) Stability throughout economic cycles / Experiential component supports e-commerce resiliency

Industry Considerations (1) Historical U.S. box office receipts illustrate stability: 3.8% CAGR since 1981 / no year worse than -7.0% (2) High variable cost structure limits rent coverage volatility: Theaters in our portfolio require ~40% drop in sales to reach breakeven on rent coverage (3) Premium video on demand (PVOD) threat is minimal: • Studios hesitant to cannibalize theatrical window • Concentrated industry preserves negotiating leverage • 95% of box office revenue made within 45 days of release(1) • PVOD offering lacks experiential component of theaters

Annual Growth in U.S. Box Office Receipts: Stability through economic cycles Black Panther Avatar 16.4% Harry Potter Avengers Lord of the Rings Transformers Incredibles 2 E.T. Star Wars 12.6% 12.9% Titanic Jurassic World 9.8% Spider-Man 9.1% Batman 9.2% 10.0% Indiana Jones 8.8% Star Wars Episode II 7.9% 7.7% 7.4% 7.4% 7.0% 7.6% 7.2% 5.8% 6.5% 4.8% 4.7% 4.2%4.9% 2.9% 1.8% 2.2% 0.8% 1.4% 0.9%1.5% 0.8%

-0.2% -0.3% -0.3% -2.7% -3.7% -4.4% -5.2% Growth During Recession -5.8% Record U.S. -5.6% -7.0% box office

➢ Industry is structurally healthy / Strong content drives annual growth

(1) Based on top 20 movies in 2018 Source: Box Office Mojo as of October 28, 2019 56 Quick-Service Restaurants (6.1% of Rent) High-quality real estate, reliable sales growth

Industry Considerations

(1) Consistent demand: Approximately 75 million Americans eat fast food every day(1) / positive trend of same-store sales growth supported by value-seeking consumers

(2) Fungibility of real estate: Positive re-leasing results on QSR locations due to convenience of real estate location and modest space footprint

(3) Less volatility than higher price point concepts: Weakness during economic downturns limited due to “trade down” effect from casual dining consumers

Same-Store Sales Growth Trends: QSR Industry Exhibits Lower Downside Volatility, Stronger Growth vs. Casual Dining(2)

6.3% 5.1%

3.1% 2.3% 2.2% 3.3% 1.2% 0.2% 1.1% 2.3% 0.4% 1.6% 0.8% -0.4% -3.0% -0.5% -2.0% QSR SSS Growth Casual Dining SSS Growth -6.6%

(1) Source: Statista (2) Represents average same-store sales growth for constituents in each group ; Source: Restaurant Research LLC, FactSet 57