Extra Space Storage vs Public Storage
EXR 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 EXR and PSA compare
Public Storage is the larger company, worth 1.9 times as much as Extra Space Storage ($62.1B against $33.1B).
On earnings, Extra Space Storage is cheaper: it trades at 32.2× trailing earnings, against 34.8× for Public Storage.
Public Storage grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.2% versus 4.1% for Extra Space Storage).
Public Storage keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 37.8% compared with 29.9% at Extra Space Storage.
Both pay dividends: Extra Space Storage yields 4.1% and Public Storage 3.6%.
Extra Space Storage scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 9 for Public Storage), 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 | EXR | PSA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $33.1B | $62.1B |
| Share price | $158.50 | $332.59 |
| Change, 1 year | 19.5% | 20.9% |
| Change, 5 years | −21.6% | 0.26% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.83 | 0.72 |
| Employees | 8,393 | 5,770 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 32.2× (better) | 34.8× |
| P/S | 9.5× (better) | 12.3× |
| P/B | 2.6× (better) | 4.3× |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.6× (better) | 17.7× |
| P/FCF | 21.3× | – |
| FCF yield | 4.7% | – |
| Fair value | $124.78 | $242.52 |
| Margin of safety | −27.0% (better) | −37.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 4.1% | 5.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 20.0% (better) | 10.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 9.5% (better) | 0.44% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 5.8% (better) | −0.83% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 4.3% | 7.5% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 73.0% | – |
| Operating margin | 43.8% | – |
| Net margin | 29.9% | 37.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 44.7% | – |
| Return on equity | 7.9% | 16.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 11.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.01 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −0.10 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.50 | 2.80 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.1% (better) | 3.6% |
| Payout ratio | 132% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 12.5% (better) | 8.4% |
| Buyback yield | 1.4% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 5.5% (better) | 3.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 81.8% |
| Held by insiders | 1.1% | 9.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.4M | −$772K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.4% | 4.2% |
Go deeper
- EXR stock overview
- EXR income statement
- EXR valuation and score
- PSA stock overview
- PSA income statement
- PSA valuation and score
Other comparisons
- CUBE vs EXR
- CUBE vs PSA
- EXR vs LAMR
- EXR vs O
- IRM vs PSA
- LINE vs PSA
- O vs PSA
- PSA vs SPG
- PSA vs VICI
- PSA vs WY
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.