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 2.0 times as much as Public Storage ($124B against $62.7B).
On earnings, Prologis is cheaper: it trades at 28.7× trailing earnings, against 35.2× for Public Storage.
Prologis grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.2% versus 5.2% for Public Storage).
Prologis keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 45.5% compared with 37.8% at Public Storage.
Both pay dividends: Prologis yields 3.2% and Public Storage 3.6%.
Prologis scores higher on the StockData Score (11 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 | PLD | PSA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $124B | $62.7B |
| Share price | $130.03 | $335.73 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.1% | 23.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −13.4% | 1.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.05 | 0.72 |
| Employees | 2,802 | 5,770 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 28.7× (better) | 35.2× |
| P/S | 13.2× | 12.5× (better) |
| P/B | 2.2× (better) | 4.3× |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.7× (better) | 17.9× |
| Fair value | $113.69 | $243.75 |
| Margin of safety | −14.4% (better) | −37.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.2% (better) | 5.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.6% (better) | 10.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 32.9% (better) | 0.44% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 32.1% (better) | −0.83% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.1% (better) | 7.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 54.8% | – |
| Net margin | 45.5% (better) | 37.8% |
| Return on equity | 7.9% | 16.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 9.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.01 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −0.10 |
| Interest coverage | 4.8× | – |
| Altman Z-score | 1.94 | 2.83 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.2% | 3.6% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 93.0% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 12 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 11.7% (better) | 8.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.2% | 3.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.9% | 81.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.24% | 9.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.1M | −$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.