Prologis vs Public Storage
PLD and PSA side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How PLD and PSA compare
Prologis is the larger company, worth 2.1 times as much as Public Storage ($119B against $57.0B).
On earnings, Prologis is cheaper: it trades at 28.5× trailing earnings, against 31.0× for Public Storage.
Prologis grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.3% versus 3.0% for Public Storage).
Prologis keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 45.8% compared with 41.8% at Public Storage.
Both pay dividends: Prologis yields 3.3% and Public Storage 3.7%.
Public Storage scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 11 for Prologis), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | PLD | PSA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $119B | $57.0B |
| Share price | $127.98 | $324.77 |
| Change, 1 year | 3.7% | 12.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −12.8% | 0.59% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.06 | 0.74 |
| Employees | 2,802 | 5,770 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 28.5× (better) | 31.0× |
| P/S | 13.0× | 11.7× (better) |
| P/B | 2.2× (better) | 6.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.7× (better) | 16.1× |
| Fair value | $112.97 | $252.73 |
| Margin of safety | −13.3% (better) | −28.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.3% (better) | 3.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.6% (better) | 10.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 22.0% (better) | 12.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 21.7% (better) | 14.3% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.1% (better) | 7.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 54.7% | – |
| Net margin | 45.8% (better) | 41.8% |
| Return on equity | 7.9% | 22.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 9.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −0.07 |
| Interest coverage | 4.8× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.91 | 3.31 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.3% | 3.7% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 92.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 12 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 11.7% (better) | 8.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.3% | 3.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 94.6% | 87.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.24% | 10.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.2M | −$772K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 4.2% |
Go deeper
- PLD stock overview
- PLD income statement
- PLD valuation and score
- PSA stock overview
- PSA income statement
- PSA valuation and score
Other comparisons
- CUBE vs PSA
- DLR vs PLD
- EQIX vs PLD
- EXR vs PSA
- IRM vs PSA
- JAN vs PLD
- LINE vs PLD
- LINE vs PSA
- O vs PSA
- PLD vs SPG
- PSA vs SPG
- PSA vs VICI
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.