Americold Realty Trust vs Prologis
COLD and PLD side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How COLD and PLD compare
Prologis is the larger company, worth 27 times as much as Americold Realty Trust ($124B against $4.6B).
On earnings, Americold Realty Trust is cheaper: it trades at 19.5× trailing earnings, against 28.7× for Prologis.
Prologis grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.2% versus 1.3% for Americold Realty Trust).
Prologis keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 45.5% compared with 9.0% at Americold Realty Trust.
Both pay dividends: Americold Realty Trust yields 5.7% and Prologis 3.2%.
Americold Realty Trust 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 | COLD | PLD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.6B | $124B |
| Share price | $16.18 | $130.03 |
| Change, 1 year | 43.3% | 4.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −49.7% | −13.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.72 | 1.05 |
| Employees | 13K | 2,802 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.5× (better) | 28.7× |
| P/S | 1.7× (better) | 13.2× |
| P/B | 1.5× (better) | 2.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | 5.8× (better) | 15.7× |
| FCF yield | −2.9% | – |
| Fair value | $28.77 | $113.69 |
| Margin of safety | 43.8% (better) | −14.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.3% | 7.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.5% | 14.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 32.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 32.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 12.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 32.2% | – |
| Operating margin | 15.1% | 54.8% (better) |
| Net margin | 9.0% | 45.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | −5.1% | – |
| Return on equity | 7.9% (better) | 7.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 13.2% (better) | 9.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Interest coverage | 2.4× | 4.8× (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.67 | 1.94 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 5.7% (better) | 3.2% |
| Payout ratio | 111% | 93.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 12 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 11.7% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.7% (better) | 3.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 109% | 92.9% |
| Held by insiders | 10.4% | 0.24% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$25.4K (better) | −$8.1M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 11.4% | – |
Go deeper
- COLD stock overview
- COLD income statement
- COLD valuation and score
- PLD stock overview
- PLD income statement
- PLD valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.