住宅地產 (EQR) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good day, and welcome to the Equity Residential 1Q 2026 earnings conference call and webcast. Today's conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Marty McKenna. Please go ahead.

大家好，歡迎收聽 Equity Residential 2026 年第一季（1Q 2026）財報電話會議與網路直播。今天的會議將進行錄音。此刻，我想將會議交給 Marty McKenna。請開始。

Good morning, and thanks for joining us to discuss Equity Residential's first quarter 2026 results.

各位早安，感謝各位加入我們，一同討論 Equity Residential 2026 年第一季的業績表現。

Our featured speakers today are Mark Parrell, our President and CEO; and Michael Manelis, our Chief Operating Officer; Bret McLeod, our CFO; and Bob Garechana, our Chief Investment Officer, are here with us as well for the Q&A.

今天的主要講者包括我們的總裁暨執行長 Mark Parrell，以及營運長 Michael Manelis；財務長 Bret McLeod 與投資長 Bob Garechana 也將一同參與問答環節。

Our earnings release is posted in the Investors section of equityapartments.com. Please be advised that certain matters discussed during this conference call may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. These forward-looking statements are subject to certain economic risks and uncertainties.

我們的財報新聞稿已發布於 equityapartments.com 的投資人專區。提醒各位，本次電話會議中討論的某些事項，可能構成聯邦證券法所定義的前瞻性陳述。這些前瞻性陳述受到特定經濟風險與不確定性的影響。

The company assumes no obligation to update or supplement these statements that become untrue because of subsequent events. Now I will turn the call over to Mark Parrell.

公司不承擔因後續事件導致上述陳述不再正確而更新或補充這些陳述的義務。現在我將把電話會議交給 Mark Parrell。

Thank you, Marty. Good morning, and thank you all for joining us today to discuss our first quarter 2026 results. I will start us off, then Michael Manelis, our Chief Operating Officer, will speak to our first quarter operating performance, and then we'll go ahead and take your questions.

謝謝你，Marty。各位早安，也感謝大家今天加入我們，一同討論 2026 年第一季的業績。我會先做開場，接著由我們的營運長 Michael Manelis 說明第一季的營運表現，然後我們將開始回答各位的提問。

Our first quarter operating results met our expectations with strength in San Francisco and New York, driving our same-store revenue performance. These two markets share common elements of strong demand from our target higher earning renter demographic for our well-located apartment homes and low levels of new supply.

我們第一季的營運結果符合預期，其中舊金山與紐約表現強勁，帶動同店營收表現。這兩個市場具有共同特徵：我們鎖定的高收入租屋族群對於地段優越的公寓住宅需求強勁，且新供給量偏低。

So let me spend a few minutes now talking about why we are excited for the setup for our business in the back half of 2026 and into 2027. As I said on our last call, we expect deliveries in our markets to be down 35% in 2026 versus 2025. And the forecast for expected future deliveries continues to show substantial declines over the next few years, creating a very positive trend line for our business.

接下來我想花幾分鐘談談，為何我們對 2026 年下半年以及進入 2027 年的業務布局感到振奮。如同我在上次電話會議所說，我們預期 2026 年在我們市場的交屋量（新供給交付）將較 2025 年下降 35%。而對未來交屋量的預測仍顯示未來幾年將大幅下滑，為我們的業務帶來非常正面的趨勢線。

Also, our higher-earning customer demographic continues to demonstrate solid financial health with rising incomes, and we also see lower delinquency across our portfolio. Then there is a single-family for sale market that continues to be a challenge in terms of both cost and inventory, translating into customers renting for longer and leading to our record low turnover levels and strong renewal rates.

此外，我們的高收入客群持續展現穩健的財務狀況，收入上升，同時我們也看到整體投資組合的逾期率下降。再者，獨棟住宅的出售市場在成本與庫存方面仍具挑戰，這使得客戶租屋時間拉長，並帶動我們創新低的周轉率與強勁的續租率。

With all those positives, the one missing ingredient is an accelerating job market and current signals there remain mixed. That said, we do see some green shoots in the form of postings on the Indeed job site for heck rolls and other similar high-earning jobs, rising substantially across many of our markets since November of 2025. That provides us cautious optimism even in the phase of recent job cut announcements at big tech firms.

在上述諸多利多之下，唯一尚缺的要素是就業市場加速成長，而目前相關訊號仍然分歧。不過，我們確實看到一些初現的正向跡象：自 2025 年 11 月以來，Indeed 求職網站上針對「heck rolls」及其他類似高收入職位的職缺刊登量，在我們許多市場大幅增加。即便近期大型科技公司宣布裁員，我們仍因此抱持審慎樂觀。

But with a portfolio that is more than 96% occupied with much lower levels of new apartment supply for the foreseeable future and limited owned housing choices, it will not take a lot of new jobs to drive more widespread, strong operating performance in the future.

然而，我們的投資組合入住率超過 96%，且在可預見的未來新公寓供給將大幅降低，加上自有住宅選擇有限，因此未來只要新增就業機會不需要太多，就能帶動更廣泛且強勁的營運表現。

On the transactions front, we did not acquire or sell any assets in the first quarter. We did update our transaction guidance for the rest of the year to reflect the likely sale of a couple of properties. This is a continuation of our process of improving the portfolio by selling older capital-intensive assets are assets in places where we have heavy concentrations. As we previously disclosed, we repurchased $220 million of our common shares during the first quarter, bringing total repurchase activity to $500 million since August of 2025.

在交易方面，我們第一季未進行任何資產收購或出售。我們已更新今年其餘期間的交易指引，以反映可能出售少數幾處物業。這延續了我們透過出售較老、資本支出密集的資產，或位於我們持有高度集中的地區之資產，來優化投資組合的流程。如先前揭露，我們在第一季回購了 2.2 億美元普通股，使得自 2025 年 8 月以來的回購總額達到 5 億美元。

And with that, I'll turn the call over to Michael Manelis.

接下來，我把電話會議交給 Michael Manelis。

Thanks, Mark, and thanks, everybody, for joining us today. I'm going to provide a quick update on our operating performance, including some high-level market commentary, and then we'll begin the Q&A session.

謝謝你，Mark，也謝謝各位今天加入我們。我將快速更新我們的營運表現，包括一些高層次的市場評論，接著我們就開始問答環節。

So overall, we had a good first quarter with our results, reflecting the continuation of our disciplined operation execution with both same-store reported revenue and expenses generally in line with our expectations. On the expense side of the house pressure from Northeast snow removal costs and utilities, were offset by a very low 20 basis point growth in payroll.

整體而言，我們第一季表現良好，結果反映我們持續以紀律執行營運；同店口徑的已報告營收與費用大致符合預期。在費用方面，東北部除雪成本與公用事業費用的壓力，被薪資僅成長 20 個基點的低增幅所抵銷。

On the revenue side, we are starting the spring leasing season in a good position with solid demand and strong physical occupancy of 96.3%.

在營收方面，我們以良好的態勢進入春季租賃旺季，需求穩健，實體入住率達 96.3%。

During the quarter, we also saw improvements in bad debt and the financial health of our resident base remains very supportive. Household incomes for new move-ins have increased and rent income ratios have fallen to 19%. Sitting here today, net effective prices have increased just over 4% since January 1, which is in line with normal trends and our occupancy and current demand levels are providing continued momentum into the second quarter.

本季我們也看到壞帳改善，而住戶基礎的財務健康狀況仍提供強力支撐。新入住住戶的家庭收入提高，租金收入比降至 19%。截至今天，自 1 月 1 日以來，淨有效價格上升略高於 4%，符合正常趨勢；而我們的入住率與目前需求水準，正為第二季帶來持續動能。

On a cash basis, concession use continues to decrease across most of our markets and is down about 21% across the portfolio as compared to the first quarter of last year. As we have said in the past, an improving supply and demand balance leads first to increasing occupancy levels next to reduced concessions, then to absolute rental rate increases, all of which ultimately drives growing blended rates from leasing activity and future same-store revenue growth.

以現金基礎來看，多數市場的優惠（concession）使用持續下降，與去年第一季相比，整體投資組合約下降 21%。如同我們過去所說，供需平衡改善通常會先帶動入住率上升，其次是優惠減少，接著才是租金絕對水準上升；最終，這些因素會推動租賃活動的混合租金（blended rates）成長，以及未來同店營收成長。

We already see San Francisco and New York, where we are posting strong same-store revenue results as far along in this market performance continuum and expect most of our other markets to make progress to varying degrees as the year progresses. In the first quarter, we reported blended rate growth of 1.5%, which mirrored the blended rate growth from the first quarter of last year on this same-store set and demonstrates a 130 basis point sequential improvement from the fourth quarter of 2025. This sequential improvement included a 260 basis point lift in new lease change and a 30 basis point improvement in the achieved renewal rate increases.

我們已看到舊金山與紐約在此市場表現演進路徑上走在前段，並在同店營收上繳出強勁成果；我們預期隨著年度推進，其他多數市場也將以不同程度逐步改善。第一季我們回報混合租金成長 1.5%，與去年第一季在同一同店組合上的混合租金成長相當，並顯示相較 2025 年第四季有 130 個基點的季增改善。這項季增改善包含新租約變動提升 260 個基點，以及實現的續租漲幅提升 30 個基點。

Retention continues to be a key driver of our performance, our centralized renewal strategy is performing well as evidenced by 61% of our residents renewing with a 4.7% achieved renewal rate increase, which was slightly better than what we expected. Looking across our footprint, performance continues to vary by market, which was expected.

留住住戶（Retention）仍是我們表現的關鍵驅動因素；我們的集中式續租策略運作良好，具體表現在 61% 的住戶選擇續租，且實現的續租漲幅為 4.7%，略優於我們的預期。放眼我們的整體布局，各市場表現仍有差異，這也在預期之中。

The strength in key gateway markets like San Francisco and New York, which both exceeded our already high expectations for the quarter are offsetting a slower-than-expected start in Boston and Seattle. Together, New York and San Francisco constitute about 30% of our NOI and have the best supply and demand outlooks in the country.

舊金山與紐約等關鍵門戶市場的強勁表現——兩者在本季都超出我們原本已相當高的預期——正在抵銷波士頓與西雅圖開局慢於預期的影響。紐約與舊金山合計約占我們 NOI 的 30%，並擁有全美最佳的供需展望。

Our urban exposure in these two markets is particularly unique to equity residential and should be a relative strength for us versus our peers this year. San Francisco continues to be the best-performing market in our portfolio. The tremendous growth in AI is making San Francisco, particularly the downtown, the place to be. Despite a few headline grabbing layoff announcements, the market continues to have good job postings and strong office leasing activity.

我們在這兩個市場的都會型資產曝險，對 Equity Residential 而言特別獨特，並且在今年相較同業應是我們的相對優勢。舊金山仍是我們投資組合中表現最佳的市場。AI 的爆發性成長正使舊金山、尤其是市中心，成為最具吸引力的地點。儘管有少數引發媒體關注的裁員消息，該市場仍持續出現良好的職缺刊登量與強勁的辦公室租賃活動。

Looking at migration patterns, we are seeing more residents come to us from out-of-state and outside the MSA, which is a good sign for continued pricing power. Concession use in the downtown submarket where we derive 22% of our NOI here is virtually non-existent. The overall catalyst here is that strong demand is meeting a market that will deliver almost no new competitive supply in 2026.

從遷徙模式來看，我們看到有更多住戶從外州以及都會統計區（MSA）以外搬來，這對於持續的租金定價能力而言是個好跡象。在我們於此取得22% NOI的市中心子市場，幾乎不存在使用租金讓利（concessions）的情況。整體的催化因素在於：強勁需求正遇上市場在2026年幾乎不會交付任何新的具競爭性的供給。

New York also continues to post excellent performance with demand outpacing supply and has almost no new competitive deliveries coming online in 2026. The large financial institutions continue to produce record profits and employment in the market is very stable. This sets us up for another year of strong results.

紐約也持續繳出優異表現，需求超過供給，且在2026年幾乎沒有新的具競爭性的交付案上線。大型金融機構持續創造創紀錄的獲利，而市場就業也非常穩定。這讓我們有條件再迎來一年強勁的成果。

Boston started the year with challenging weather conditions and is also still feeling the impact in Cambridge around life science funding. Our overall outlook for Boston has moderated as a result, but this is a very seasonal market, and it's still early. Overall, we still think that the city will outperform the suburbs based on the location of the 2026 new deliveries.

波士頓年初遭遇具挑戰性的天候狀況，同時在劍橋地區也仍感受到生命科學資金募集環境的影響。因此，我們對波士頓的整體展望有所下修，但這是一個非常具季節性的市場，而且現在仍算早。整體而言，基於2026年新交付案的區位分布，我們仍認為市區表現將優於郊區。

And while DC is performing in line with our modest expectations, pricing power is less than normal, although we expect that to improve as the year progresses, given the dramatic decline in new deliveries. With only 4,000 units being delivered this year, a decline of over 65%, the real question here is whether we will see any improvement in consumer confidence in this market. The current levels of uncertainty are clearly holding back the potential for this market. Any positive shift should allow us to recover from what has been a slower start to the year.

至於華盛頓特區（DC），雖然表現符合我們較為溫和的預期，但定價能力低於常態；不過，鑑於新交付量大幅下滑，我們預期隨著年度推進情況會改善。今年僅交付4,000戶、降幅超過65%，真正的問題在於：我們是否會看到此市場的消費者信心有所改善。目前的不確定性水準顯然正在抑制這個市場的潛力。任何正向轉變都應能讓我們從年初較慢的起步中回復。

Heading back to the West Coast, Seattle is not experiencing the AI-driven demand boom that we're seeing in San Francisco and is currently trending below our expectations due to a slower start to the year. Historically, Seattle has followed cyclical trends from San Francisco, both good and bad, by about a year. And while it's still too early to call, given some of the headline risks regarding layoffs, we still see the potential for this market to tighten up.

回到西岸，西雅圖並未出現我們在舊金山所看到的AI帶動需求榮景，且由於年初起步較慢，目前走勢低於我們的預期。歷史上，西雅圖通常會在約一年後跟隨舊金山的景氣循環趨勢，無論好壞皆然。雖然考量到裁員相關的頭條風險，現在下定論仍為時過早，但我們仍看到此市場收緊的潛力。

Today, the market is still working to absorb the new deliveries from 2025. Concession use is down 22% in the quarter, but demand is still price sensitive causing this market to lag normal seasonal improvements. On a positive note, we've seen some good traction in the Bellevue, Redmond submarket with recent office leasing activity announcements and having more residents during the quarter come to us from outside the MSA. Right now, rents are trending positive year-over-year and concession use is very limited in the Bellevue, Redmond submarket.

目前市場仍在努力消化2025年的新交付供給。本季租金讓利（concessions）使用量下降22%，但需求仍對價格敏感，導致此市場落後於正常的季節性改善。正面來看，我們在Bellevue、Redmond子市場看到不錯的進展，近期有辦公室租賃活動的公告，且本季也有更多住戶從MSA以外搬來。目前租金年增率呈正向趨勢，而在Bellevue、Redmond子市場的租金讓利使用非常有限。

In Southern California, Los Angeles is performing in line with our tempered expectations. While the downtown is starting to feel a little better as the city prepares for the events like the World Cup and Olympics, continued uncertainty in the entertainment business is an overhang on the market and we have still not yet seen any catalyst on the job front that will drive growth in the near term.

在南加州，洛杉磯的表現符合我們較為保守的預期。雖然隨著城市為世界盃與奧運等活動做準備，市中心開始感覺好轉一些，但娛樂產業持續的不確定性仍是市場的壓力來源，而且我們在就業面仍尚未看到任何能在短期內帶動成長的催化因素。

In our newer markets, we continue to see improving conditions in both Atlanta and Dallas with concession use coming down, which again is an early indicator that the overall market is improving. Atlanta is performing the best, and if the current trends continue, this market should deliver slightly positive same-store revenue growth for the year which is better than what we thought 90 days ago.

在我們較新的市場中，亞特蘭大與達拉斯的狀況持續改善，租金讓利（concessions）使用量下降，這再次是整體市場正在改善的早期指標。亞特蘭大表現最佳，若目前趨勢延續，該市場今年應可帶來略為正向的同店營收成長，優於我們90天前的預期。

Turning to Denver. We are seeing some strength in occupancy and initial signs that the market may have bottomed out. With a sizable decline in new starts, improving operating conditions and current competitive pressure easing, our newer markets, excluding Austin, Texas, all have the right setup for recovery through the balance of this year.

接著談丹佛。我們看到入住率有些強勁表現，且初步跡象顯示市場可能已觸底。在新開工量大幅下滑、營運環境改善以及目前競爭壓力緩解的情況下，我們較新的市場（不含德州奧斯汀）在今年剩餘期間都具備復甦的良好條件。

On the innovation front, we're about six months into our full deployment of the AI-assisted application process, which includes screening. As I mentioned, delinquency from new resonance is trending down, resulting in improvements in our bad debt net performance. We're also continuing with the successful rollout of our bulk Internet program, and we'll have about 60% of the portfolio live by year-end.

在創新方面，我們全面部署AI輔助申請流程（包含審核）已約六個月。如我先前提到，新住戶的欠繳情況呈下降趨勢，帶動我們淨壞帳表現改善。我們也持續成功推動整批網路（bulk Internet）方案的上線，預計到年底將有約60%的投資組合啟用。

We believe that offering a superior connectivity at pricing that is better than our residents can get on their own is supportive of our goal of delivering a value-add customer experience. As we look ahead, our priorities remain unchanged. We are focused on driving disciplined pricing, reinforcing retention and maintaining tight control over expenses.

我們相信，以比住戶自行取得更優惠的價格提供更優質的連線服務，有助於我們達成提供增值型（value-add）客戶體驗的目標。展望未來，我們的優先事項維持不變。我們專注於推動有紀律的定價、強化續住（retention），並持續嚴格控管費用。

As we head into our primary leasing season, the environment at a high level is stable and in many areas improving. Portfolio-wide occupancy remains at strong levels to our focus naturally shifts from a reliance on occupancy gains to optimizing pricing. In the second quarter, we expect to see a sequential build in new lease change and strong, stable performance in terms of retention and achieved renewal rate increases.

隨著我們進入主要租賃旺季，整體環境保持穩定，且許多區域正在改善。全投資組合的入住率仍維持在強勁水準，因此我們的重心自然會從依賴入住率提升，轉向最佳化定價。在第二季，我們預期新租約變動將呈現季比逐步走強，並在續住率與已達成的續約租金調升方面維持強勁且穩定的表現。

Overall, we are well positioned and we'll maintain our operational agility and strategic focus to deliver sustained value with the best operating platform and people in the industry that combine automation, centralization, and a passion to deliver a seamless customer experience to our residents.

整體而言，我們已做好充分準備，並將維持營運敏捷性與策略聚焦，憑藉業界最佳的營運平台與人才，結合自動化、集中化，以及致力於為住戶提供無縫客戶體驗的熱忱，來持續創造價值。

At this time, I will turn the call over to the operator to begin the Q&A session.

此刻，我將把電話會議交給接線員，開始問答環節。

(Operator Instructions) Eric Wolf with Citi.

(接線員指示) 花旗（Citi）的Eric Wolf。

I think last year in May, we started to see a few signs of an earlier peak in pricing. As you look forward 30 to 60 days, are you seeing anything that would suggest something similar to last year? Or does the seasonality at this point look more normal to you?

我想去年5月，我們開始看到一些租金定價較早見頂的跡象。展望未來30到60天，你們是否看到任何可能暗示類似去年情況的訊號？或者就目前而言，季節性看起來對你們更為正常？

Eric, this is Michael. I think relative to last year, I look at this and say, our setup was pretty good at this time last year as well, and we feel good about the positioning that we have. The strength that we see on the retention side of the business right now gives us a lot of confidence that heading through the spring into the peak that we're going to maintain this position that we have.

Eric，我是Michael。我認為相較去年，我看這件事會說：去年此時我們的態勢其實也相當不錯，而我們對目前的布局也感到樂觀。我們現在在業務的續住端所看到的強勁表現，讓我們對於從春季走向旺季時能維持目前的態勢很有信心。

So I think what we have is a setup that is a little different than last year, with the weakening that we really started to feel, I would say, more in the late second quarter or third quarter, we are heading into a place of unprecedented times with such low levels of new supply. But I think if we can maintain this velocity and get over the peak leasing season, that back half of the year with the setup of such limited new competitive supply coming online, really does position this portfolio well.

所以我認為，我們目前的態勢與去年有些不同；去年我們真正開始感受到走弱，我會說是在第二季後段或第三季。現在我們正走向一個前所未見的階段，因為新供給水準非常低。但我認為，只要我們能維持這個動能並度過租賃旺季高峰，那麼在下半年、在新增具競爭性的供給上線極為有限的格局下，確實會讓這個投資組合處於非常有利的位置。

Makes sense. And then you mentioned that rent incomes were at 19% now. Can you just remind me what the sort of lowest that has ever gone. And I don't know if you have an opinion about sort of why rent growth has become a bit more disconnected from wage growth than is typical.

了解。另外你提到租金占收入比現在是19%。你能否提醒我，歷史上最低曾降到多少？以及我不確定你是否有看法，為什麼租金成長與薪資成長之間的連動，似乎比典型情況更為脫鉤？

Yeah. I mean, I think the range is historically have always been somewhere between 17% to 23% across our markets. And I think at any given time, you've seen this portfolio be 19% to 20%. So it feels like we're kind of right in line with the norms. I think what we saw in this quarter is you just saw a place where incomes have grown and you can see the demand coming in that just have some higher income levels against rents that are in line with normal seasonality, but I think that increase in the income is what caused us to tick down a little bit.

是的。我的意思是，歷史上在我們各市場的區間大致一直落在17%到23%之間。而在任何特定時間點，你也看過這個投資組合落在19%到20%。所以感覺我們大致符合常態。我認為本季你看到的是：收入成長了，你也能看到進來的需求具有較高的收入水準，而租金則仍符合正常的季節性；但我想正是收入的上升，讓這個比率小幅下降。

Steve Sakwa, Evercore ISI.

Steve Sakwa，Evercore ISI。

Michael, I don't know if I missed it, but did you talk about where renewals were going out for May and June? And I guess, what are you achieving on those versus sending out? And just remind us what your blended spread expectations are for the year?

Michael，我不確定我是不是漏聽了，但你有談到 5 月和 6 月的續約報價目前送出的水準嗎？另外我想問，你們在這些續約上實際達成的結果，相較於送出的報價大概如何？也請再提醒我們一下，你們對今年整體混合租金漲幅（blended spread）的預期是多少？

Yeah. So Steve, this is Michael. So right now, I would say the renewal quotes that are out there really for the next kind of three months already at this point. And we're sitting somewhere just over 6% kind of with the quotes and kind of have a lot of confidence in our centralized renewal process. Our centralized renewal team handles all the negotiations.

有。Steve，我是 Michael。就目前來看，我會說接下來大概三個月的續約報價其實現在都已經在市場上了。以這些報價來看，我們大概落在略高於 6% 的水準，而且我們對集中式續約流程很有信心。我們的集中式續約團隊負責所有談判。

It allows us to kind of execute various strategies across markets and submarkets. This is the time of the year where we tighten up negotiations. So we got a pretty high degree of confidence that we're going to maintain and achieve renewal rate increase somewhere right around that 5% range in the months to come. So in terms of the blended rates right now, we're not changing our full year expectations. We had about a 1.5% to 3% growth rate.

這讓我們能在不同市場與次市場執行各種策略。每年這個時點，我們會把談判收緊。因此我們相當有信心，在接下來幾個月能維持並達成大約 5% 左右的續約租金調升幅度。至於目前的混合租金漲幅，我們不會調整全年預期。我們原先預期約 1.5% 到 3% 的成長率。

And embedded in that was implied new lease change roughly flat renewals somewhere around that 4.5% to 4.75% range. And right now, renewals are doing a little bit better than what we thought. New leases a little bit later than what we thought. So we love the setup heading into the peak leasing season. We love the supply picture in the back half of the year.

其中隱含的新租約變動大致持平，續約大約在 4.5% 到 4.75% 的區間。而目前續約表現比我們原先想的稍好。新租約則比我們原先想的稍晚一些。所以我們很喜歡在旺季租賃季來臨前的這個態勢。我們也很喜歡下半年供給面的情況。

But at this point, it's still probably too early in the year for us to change that full year outlook for the blends.

但就目前而言，現在可能還太早，因此我們不會調整對全年混合租金漲幅的展望。

Okay. And then maybe just on capital allocation for either Bret or Mark. There's obviously been a pretty big dislocation in the public markets versus private market. Have you guys thought about leaning even heavier into the disposition program and kind of taking advantage of kind of what the private market is offering? Either to build up the balance sheet or kind of take advantage of buybacks?

了解。接著可能想請 Bret 或 Mark 談一下資本配置。公開市場相對於私募市場顯然出現了相當大的錯位。你們是否有考慮更大幅度地加碼處分計畫，利用私募市場目前提供的條件？例如用來強化資產負債表，或是把握機會進行庫藏股回購？

Yeah. Thanks, Steve. It's Mark. I'm going to start, and then Bob will kind of give you a feel for the disposition market. So we are open.

是的。謝謝你，Steve。我是 Mark。我先說明一下，然後 Bob 會再跟你分享處分市場的狀況。我們是開放的。

We've done a fair amount of net disposition activity. You saw last year, $500 million. We took third, fourth and into the first quarter of this year to deploy those proceeds into the buyback. We're open to doing more buybacks. We like the match of selling these lower-growth assets and buying the stock.

我們已經做了相當多的淨處分活動。你去年看到的是 5 億美元。我們在去年第三、第四季以及今年第一季，把這些資金用於回購。我們也願意做更多回購。我們喜歡這種搭配：賣出這些低成長資產，然後買回自家股票。

So we're very open to that. It's just it comes and goes a little bit. So I'll let Bob talk about some of the assets that are embedded in the increased disposition guidance you saw and some of the other stuff we might expose to the market. And we are open to using the balance sheet, meaning using debt to buy stock back. But you just have to remember that's a very different decision because you're affecting the capital structure of the company.

所以我們非常願意這麼做。只是這件事會有些起伏。我讓 Bob 談談你看到我們提高處分指引中所包含的一些資產，以及其他我們可能會拿到市場上測試的標的。另外，我們也願意運用資產負債表，也就是用舉債來回購股票。但你必須記得，那是非常不同的決策，因為你會影響公司的資本結構。

And you can only do that a certain number of times before, obviously, you've used that capacity up. So our preferred means is dispositions. But of course, we are aware that at 4.3 times were relatively underlevered and have that opportunity as well. So Bob, do you want to --

而且你能這麼做的次數有限，因為很明顯你會把那個額度用完。所以我們偏好的方式是透過處分。但當然，我們也知道以 4.3 倍來看，我們的槓桿相對偏低，也同樣有這個空間。所以 Bob，你要不要--

Yes. Steve, it's Bob. And as Mark mentioned, we did introduce disposition guidance for the quarter, for the first time, so a $165 million. And these are assets that we're pretty confident that we're going to execute on, and that's why we introduced them into the mix. I think the critical thing that Mark already mentioned about what we're looking to sell are assets that are perhaps not best suited for our portfolio today, right?

好的。Steve，我是 Bob。如 Mark 提到的，我們這一季首次提出了處分指引，金額為 1.65 億美元。這些是我們相當有把握能執行的資產，因此才把它們納入指引。我認為關鍵在於，Mark 已經提到我們想賣的是哪些資產：也就是可能不再最適合我們目前投資組合的資產，對吧？

So these are assets that have value-add components or growth components or concentration risk. So those do take a little longer, typically to execute from a disposition standpoint because the buyer pool may not be as broad as just down the main fairway. That being said, interest is, I think, the world has seen in multifamily in the private sector is very robust. And so we continue to see bidding tents that are very large. We continue to see interest in our asset class, and we continue to see a lot of private capital.

因此這些資產可能帶有增值（value-add）或成長的成分，或是有集中度風險。所以從處分角度來看，這類資產通常需要更長時間才能成交，因為買方族群可能不像一般核心資產那麼廣。即便如此，我認為大家都看到私募部門對多戶住宅（multifamily）的興趣非常強勁。因此我們持續看到非常大的投標陣容。我們持續看到市場對我們這個資產類別的興趣，也持續看到大量私募資金。

So I think you'll continue to see us execute as we go.

所以我想你會持續看到我們在推進過程中逐步完成交易。

Jana Galan, Bank of America.

Jana Galan，美國銀行。

Congrats on a great start to the year. And Michael, thank you for all the geographic detail. Can you comment on the magnitude of the decline in concession usage by markets? Just trying to figure out where we could start to see the new leases inflect sooner versus later?

恭喜今年開局表現很強。Michael，也謝謝你提供這麼多地理區域的細節。你能否談談各市場使用租賃優惠（concessions）的下降幅度？我想了解哪些地方的新租約可能會較早出現拐點、哪些可能較晚？

Yeah. I mean, really, the concession dollar amounts across most of the markets are down because this is a low volume of transactions in the first quarter as well. As we think about the concession use going forward, my guess is right now, we're going to see continued elevated cash concessions in the newer market along with kind of probably into the DC and maybe even Seattle markets for the second quarter.

好的。我的意思是，其實多數市場的優惠金額都在下降，因為第一季的交易量也偏低。至於未來的優惠使用情況，我猜目前我們會在較新的市場持續看到偏高的現金優惠，第二季可能也會延伸到華盛頓特區，甚至可能包括西雅圖市場。

So for us, when we modeled the concessions out we still kept the concessions pretty heavy through the expansion market for most of the year. As we turn the corner into the second half of the year, given the decline in supply, we expect concessions to materially decline, especially relative to the increases that we saw in the second half of last year.

所以就我們而言，在建模優惠時，我們仍然把擴張型市場（expansion market）的優惠在全年大部分時間維持在較高水準。當我們進入下半年、供給下降之後，我們預期優惠會明顯下滑，尤其是相較於去年下半年我們看到的增加幅度。

So I think the expectations right now on a full year for concessions, I would still model somewhere about 20% reduction relative to what we used in 2025. In the second quarter, my guess is that the year-over-year reduction is probably going to be a little bit less than that because the cash concessions are probably going to stay about the same as what we just did in the first quarter. But then as we turn the corner into the second half of the year, we do expect them to be down considerably compared to last year.

因此我認為目前對全年優惠的預期，我仍會建議模型假設相較於我們在 2025 年使用的水準，約下降 20%。第二季我猜年對年降幅可能會比這個數字小一些，因為現金優惠大概會維持在我們第一季剛做的水準。但當我們進入下半年，我們確實預期相較去年會大幅下降。

So concentrated again, newer markets, a little bit in DC and Seattle. But outside of that, the majority of the markets are going to continue to see reductions.

所以仍然是集中在較新的市場，另外在華盛頓特區和西雅圖也會有一些。但除此之外，多數市場應該會持續看到優惠下降。

John Kim, BMO Capital Markets.

John Kim，BMO Capital Markets。

Looking at your prior years, it looks like the April new leases tend to be fairly representative of what you end up in the second quarter. So I'm wondering if you feel that dynamic is going to occur again this year at minus 1.1%. Or do you think there's a chance of inflect positively?

回顧你們過去幾年，看起來4月的新租約通常相當能代表你們第二季最後的結果。所以我想請教，你們覺得今年在-1.1%時，這種動態會再次出現嗎？還是你們認為有機會轉為正向？

John, it's Michael. No, look, I think you're going to continue to see a sequential build. Our net effective pricing is continuing to grow across this portfolio. So my guess is we should expect to see some continuation momentum of improving new lease change. I don't think it's going to be like materially different than what you can see we just posted, but I don't expect us to end the quarter at minus negative 1% for the quarter.

John，我是Michael。不，我認為你們會繼續看到逐月的連續改善。我們在這個投資組合的淨有效租金（net effective pricing）仍在持續成長。所以我猜我們應該會看到新租約變動持續改善的動能。我不認為會和我們剛公布的數字有「實質上」很大的不同，但我不預期我們整個季度最後會是負1%（-1%）左右。

My guess is you'll see each month sequentially build and put us closer to kind of flat.

我猜每個月都會逐月往上，讓我們更接近大致持平。

Okay. And then New York, it's been several quarters where you've been saying it's been one of your stronger performing markets. Recently, there have been some high-end multifamily assets that traded hands to another public REIT. So I'm just wondering, are those assets that you looked at? Is this a market where you would allocate more capital? Or are you still really focused on some of the expansion markets?

好的。另外，紐約這幾季你們一直說是表現較強的市場之一。最近有一些高端多戶住宅資產轉手賣給另一家上市REIT。所以我想問，那些資產你們有看過嗎？這會是你們願意配置更多資本的市場嗎？還是你們仍然更專注在一些擴張型市場？

Yeah. Thanks for that question, John. I'm going to just start about New York in general. And I'm going to let Bob talk about the deal that stuff that traded in our interest or relative lack of interest. So we're about 14% allocated to New York Metro, mostly Brooklyn, Manhattan and a little bit of the Jersey Coast and one asset in suburban New York.

是的。謝謝這個問題，John。我先從整體紐約談起。至於那些成交的案子，我會讓Bob談談我們是否有興趣或相對缺乏興趣。我們大約有14%配置在紐約都會區，主要在布魯克林、曼哈頓，還有一小部分在新澤西海岸，以及在紐約郊區有一個資產。

Pretty unique portfolio. It's performing really well. We're benefiting from all the banks doing so well. We're benefiting from financing of the AI boom, all those things and some pretty limited supply in that market. I feel like we're more kind of in a trading mindset in New York, 14% feels about right to us.

這是一個相當獨特的投資組合。表現非常好。我們受惠於銀行業表現強勁。也受惠於AI熱潮的融資活動等因素，以及該市場相當有限的供給。我覺得我們在紐約比較偏向「交易」的心態，14%對我們來說大致剛好。

So you may see us sell, you may see us buy. But by and large, 14% feels like a really good weighting. And our urban portfolio feels like a uniquely positive thing for us compared to our peer group. And then Bob, if you want to comment on what's sold?

所以你可能會看到我們賣出，也可能會看到我們買進。但整體而言，14%這個比重我們覺得非常合適。而且相較同業，我們的都會型投資組合對我們而言是一個獨特且正面的優勢。Bob，你要不要評論一下賣掉的是哪些？

Yes. We -- I would say that we underwrite everything, whether or not we look at something and bid on something is different, and we did not bid or look at these specifically, but we certainly underwrote them. One of the benefits of our Manhattan portfolio that's also kind of a nuanced approach. It's pretty straightforward and pretty simple in that we don't have a lot of 421-a burn off. We don't have an extensive amount of retail exposure.

好的。我們——我會說我們會對所有案子做承作評估（underwrite）；至於是否真的去看、去出價是另一回事，而我們沒有對這些案子特別去出價或實地看案，但我們確實有做承作評估。我們曼哈頓投資組合的一個優點，也是一種較細緻的做法。它其實很直接、很簡單，因為我們沒有太多421-a稅務優惠到期（burn off）的影響。我們也沒有大量的零售曝險。

And so they're pretty straightforward. And that's one of the benefits that you see flowing through to the underlying NOI. The assets that ended up trading were a little more complicated than our liking. So they had more retail components. They had more tax abatement burn-off components.

所以它們相當單純。這也是你會看到反映在底層NOI（淨營運收入）上的好處之一。最後成交的那些資產，比我們偏好的複雜一些。因此它們有更多零售組成。也有更多稅務減免到期（burn-off）的因素。

And just frankly, weren't of interest. So we didn't bid or look at them.

坦白說，我們沒有興趣。所以我們沒有出價或去看。

St. Juste, Mizuho.

St. Juste，瑞穗（Mizuho）。

Great to see the continued strength in San Francisco and New York. It seems like the slowdown, as you mentioned, DC and LA was in line with expectation, Boston, Seattle, a bit weaker. But I guess I'm curious, kind of beyond the next few months, New York and San Francisco clearly had momentum. What are you expecting for your coastal markets, the other group, I mentioned, the LA, Seattle, DC, Boston, how do you expect them to trend over the next year? Which of those markets are you most excited about? It seems as though there's tougher comps in some cases, weaker demand drivers. So curious how you're -- what data you're looking at, which of those markets perhaps you're more encouraged about over the next 12, 18 months?

很高興看到舊金山和紐約持續展現強勁表現。如你們提到的，華府特區（DC）和洛杉磯（LA）的放緩似乎符合預期；波士頓、西雅圖則弱一些。但我想問的是，放眼未來幾個月之後，紐約和舊金山顯然有動能。你們對其他沿海市場——我提到的LA、西雅圖、DC、波士頓——未來一年你們預期它們會怎麼走？你們對其中哪些市場最感到興奮？看起來有些市場在某些情況下面臨較艱難的比較基期、需求驅動因素也較弱。所以想了解你們在看哪些數據，以及在未來12到18個月，哪些市場可能讓你們更受鼓舞？

Yeah, it's Michael. Look, looking -- sitting here today, you have to focus on DC with such tremendous drop-off in the supply. I mean, it's 65% less new units coming online. That will equate to some level of pricing power in that market.

是的，我是Michael。你看，以今天坐在這裡的角度，你必須關注DC，因為供給下滑非常劇烈。我的意思是，新交付單位（new units）上線量少了65%。這將在該市場帶來某種程度的定價能力。

So we didn't have -- we have pretty modest expectations for the full year. But I think as you fast forward and go out 12 to 18 months, that market with such little new competitive supply. So I think a few starts actually in the market as well, sets up for another strong year next year. We need a little bit of confidence on the demand side of the equation for us to really see that thing take hold. Outside of that, I've said for LA, we had muted expectations.

所以我們——對全年其實沒有太高的期待，預期相當溫和。但我認為如果你把時間往前推、看12到18個月後，這個市場在競爭性新增供給如此有限的情況下——而且我認為市場上也只有少數幾個新開工案——會為明年再度成為強勁的一年做好鋪墊。我們需要在需求端有一點信心，才能真正看到這件事成形。除此之外，關於LA，我之前說過，我們的預期偏保守。

I don't know that we've seen anything yet to suggest that we'll model differently for the balance of this year. and we'll see where the entertainment industry is kind of closer to the end of the year before we talk about next year on those. The Boston and the Seattle markets right now, I think they're off to a slow start. Boston had a really horrific winner, cold, lot of snow kind of probably impacted a little bit at the start that we're seeing. I like the setup in both of these markets, and I like the recovery potential of Seattle.

我不確定我們目前看到的情況是否足以讓我們在今年剩餘時間改變模型假設；至於那些，我們會在接近年底時再看看娛樂產業的狀況，再來談明年的展望。波士頓和西雅圖市場目前我認為起步偏慢。波士頓今年冬天非常嚴酷，寒冷、降雪很多，可能在我們看到的年初表現上造成了一些影響。我喜歡這兩個市場的基本面布局，也看好西雅圖的復甦潛力。

The history has shown it follows San Francisco, good or bad, by about a year. So my guess is we'll start talking positively about Seattle sometime here this year or into the early part of next year.

歷史顯示，它會跟隨舊金山的走勢——不論好壞——大約落後一年。所以我猜我們會在今年某個時點，或到明年初開始更正面地談西雅圖。

That's great color. Appreciate that. On the -- perhaps on the [Sunbelt] or the expansion market, I think you said and forgive me a misquoting that they have the right setup for recovery into next year. We know the supply is falling. But maybe some color on where you're seeing some improving demand, pricing power or concessions are probably coming off the most.

這些說明很有幫助。謝謝。關於——也許是[Sunbelt]或擴張型市場，我想你說過（如果我引述有誤請見諒）它們具備在明年走向復甦的良好條件。我們知道供給正在下降。但能否多分享一些，你們在哪些地方看到需求改善、定價能力提升，或租賃讓利（concessions）下降得最明顯？

So maybe some color on that comment and which markets perhaps are standing up beyond the maybe the Atlantics of the world?

所以也請就那段評論多給一些背景，以及除了可能像亞特蘭大（Atlanta）這類市場之外，哪些市場的表現正在站穩？

Yes. So let me just add, I can't speak about the Sunbelt I can only talk about the few markets that we own and operate in those. So really, Atlanta, Dallas and Austin, right now, we have three properties in Austin. We don't expect any material change in performance this year because there's still a lot of overhang of supply and there's still some new supply being delivered this year. Between Atlanta and Dallas, Atlanta really ticked up a lot for us this last quarter and is now kind of set up to potentially eke out some positive revenue growth this year, which is better than what we thought.

是的。所以我補充一下，我無法評論Sunbelt，我只能談我們擁有並營運的少數幾個市場。也就是說，亞特蘭大、達拉斯和奧斯汀；目前我們在奧斯汀有三個物業。我們不預期今年的表現會有任何實質性的變化，因為供給過剩的壓力仍然很大，而且今年仍會有一些新供給交付。在亞特蘭大和達拉斯之間，亞特蘭大在上一季對我們而言確實大幅回升，現在看起來有機會在今年勉強實現一些正的營收成長，這比我們原先預期的要好。

So we have seen concessions pull back. We do see kind of good occupancy. We do have kind of that momentum right now heading into the peak that is outperforming what we're seeing in Dallas, but Dallas still sitting here today feels pretty good. It's got -- it's doing a little bit better than what we thought, but Atlanta feels like it's got more momentum right now.

所以我們看到讓利（concessions）已經回收。我們也看到入住率表現不錯。我們目前在進入旺季前的動能，確實優於我們在達拉斯看到的情況，但達拉斯就今天來看仍然感覺相當不錯。它的表現比我們想的稍微好一些，但亞特蘭大目前看起來動能更強。

Brad Heffern, RBC Capital Markets.

Brad Heffern，RBC Capital Markets。

Yes. So the Bay Area continues to be very strong, and you talked about AI driving that. There's a lot of investor debate about whether this is going to be a multiyear trend or whether AI ultimately pushes employment the other way. Obviously, nobody knows, but I'm just curious to get your take on how sustainable you see the strength in the Bay Area as being?

是的。所以灣區持續非常強勁，你也提到AI正在推動這股力道。投資人之間有很多討論：這會不會是一個多年期的趨勢，或者AI最終會把就業推向相反方向。顯然沒有人知道，但我想請教你，你認為灣區的強勢有多可持續？

Yeah, it's Mark. That's obviously a bit of a speculative question, and I know you probably feel that too. To us, it feels like the AI boom and be honest, the affordability boom in San Francisco is likely to continue. I mean rents downtown, where we have a significant portfolio of just recently moved above rent levels just before COVID. So our resident can certainly reflect back on getting a 30% increase in nominal wages since 2019 and have the rent about flat.

對，我是Mark。這顯然有點偏推測性的問題，我知道你可能也這麼覺得。對我們而言，AI熱潮——坦白說，還有舊金山的可負擔性改善——看起來都很可能會延續。我的意思是，在市中心，我們有相當規模的投資組合，那裡的租金最近才剛回到略高於COVID之前的水準。因此，我們的住戶完全可以回頭看：自2019年以來名目薪資上升了30%，但租金大致持平。

So there's room to run there. We see all the office leasing activity, everything around AI. It isn't just the actual creators of AI, it's all the systems that sit on top of it. A lot of this employ in the small groups of people building on top of AI systems, various helpful applications of sorts. So I think there's room to run here.

所以那裡還有上行空間。我們看到所有的辦公室租賃活動，以及圍繞AI的一切。不只是AI的實際創造者，還包括建立在其上的各種系統。其中很多是由小團隊在AI系統之上開發，做出各式各樣有用的應用。所以我認為這裡還有成長空間。

I think this technology there'll be ebbs and flows and valuation, things will happen. But I think there's a lot to come here, and I think the resident can afford it because I think their nominal wages have gone up quite considerably in the San Francisco area.

我認為這項技術會有起伏與波動，估值也會有變化，事情會發生。但我覺得接下來還有很多可期待的，而且我認為住戶負擔得起，因為我認為舊金山地區的名目薪資已經相當明顯地上升。

So this deal is pretty persistent to us. And again, the ecosystem of great universities and all the venture capital money in the area and all that is also supportive of this continuing to be a kind of innovation center for everything AI and everything else, technology related, which does seem to me to be the future even if there are fits and starts.

所以對我們來說，這股趨勢相當持久。而且再說一次，當地優秀大學的生態系、區域內大量的創投資金等等，也都支持這裡持續成為AI以及其他所有科技相關領域的創新中心；即使中間會有反覆與起落，在我看來這仍然是未來的方向。

Okay. I appreciate that. I know it's a difficult question. In the prepared remarks, you talked about residents coming to the Bay Area from outside the market. I was wondering if there are any stats or additional color you can give on that dynamic.

好的。謝謝你的說明。我知道這是個很難的問題。在事先準備的發言中，你提到住戶從市場外搬到灣區。我想知道你是否有任何統計數據或能補充一些細節，來說明這個動態？

Yeah. So I mean, every quarter, we're looking at where our new move-ins coming to us, what percent come from within the MSA. And then obviously, I've said over the last several years, right, for us to really start seeing sustained pricing power momentum, we'd like to see in some of these markets, a bigger draw from outside the MSA, a bigger draw from outside of the state.

有的。所以我的意思是，每一季我們都會看新入住者是從哪裡來的，有多少比例是來自同一個都會統計區（MSA）內。然後顯然，過去幾年我也一直說，對我們而言，要真正看到某些市場出現可持續的定價權動能，我們希望看到更多來自MSA之外的需求、更多來自州外的需求。

And we saw that both in San Francisco and in Seattle specific to the Bellevue, Redmond submarket. So they're not huge percentages. It's like 5% more move-ins. But it's the trend lines that we've seen in San Francisco now where we have multiple quarters of seeing kind of that pattern old, which is really giving us that confidence that we're in a position of pricing power for the next several quarters.

而我們在舊金山以及西雅圖（特別是Bellevue、Redmond這個子市場）都看到了這種情況。所以比例不是很大。大概是多了5%的新入住。但重點在於趨勢線：我們現在在舊金山已經連續好幾季看到這種模式持續，這也讓我們更有信心，未來幾季我們處在具備定價權的位置。

Alexander Goldfarb, Piper Sandler.

Alexander Goldfarb，Piper Sandler。

Mark, just following up on -- as you guys think about dispositions. The markets are certainly interesting, if you will. New York rebounded strong after the pandemic, San Francisco has been a dream case on the other side. You've got the contrast between Seattle and the East side, LA versus like Orange County and San Diego.

Mark，我想延伸追問一下——當你們在思考處分（dispositions）時。這些市場當然很有意思。紐約在疫情後強勁反彈，而舊金山在另一端則是個理想案例。你們也看到西雅圖與東區的對比，洛杉磯相對於橘郡與聖地牙哥的對比。

So as you guys assess your portfolio and assets to sell, how are you making the decision which markets may have deeper longer challenges, and therefore, it's worth really downsizing versus which are like the New York or San Francisco, which is at the moment in time and you just have to wait for the pendulum to come back? I'm just trying to think, as you're assessing asset sales and buybacks, how you're thinking about the market?

所以當你們評估投資組合並決定要賣哪些資產時，你們如何判斷哪些市場可能面臨更深、更長期的挑戰，因此值得大幅縮減；而哪些則像紐約或舊金山那樣，只是階段性的狀況，你只需要等待鐘擺再擺回來？我想了解的是，當你們評估資產出售與回購時，你們是如何看待市場的？

Yeah. Great question. I'm going to take the market focus. And maybe I'll have you Bob speak to asset challenges because some of these decisions, Alex, we like the market or submarket, but we just have an asset that maybe we don't believe in the capital story or the micro location. So again, just generally, our exposure pre-COVID to California was 45%.

是的。這是個好問題。我先從市場面來回答。也許我會請Bob談談資產層面的挑戰，因為有些決策上，Alex，我們喜歡某個市場或子市場，但我們可能有一個資產在資本投入的故事（capital story）或微觀區位上，我們並不買單。所以再說一次，整體而言，我們在COVID之前對加州的曝險是45%。

Now it's around 40%, getting that number down over time, probably mostly with the reduction in Los Angeles is, I would say, more of a strategic goal of ours. Right now, that's not a terribly salable market, so we can weight that out a little bit. So that's a spot where we maybe have a little less conviction is Los Angeles. And that isn't just the regulation, of course, that's pervasive in California. It's just unemployment stuff.

現在大約是40%，隨著時間推進會再把這個數字降下來，主要可能會透過降低洛杉磯的比重——我會說這更像是我們的策略目標。目前那不是一個特別好賣的市場，所以我們可以稍微等一等。所以洛杉磯是我們可能信心比較不足的地方。而這不只是監管問題——當然那在加州是普遍存在的。更多是失業相關的因素。

And Bob talked about that on the last call and Michael has, too. It's the entertainment industry really feeling like there's been a paradigm shift away from Southern California and just not feeling like those employment drivers are what we thought they were when we made those investments initially. And a little bit of downtown Seattle. That, again, is an area that has some advantages and has been kind of recovering and fits and starts, but we do have a fair bit of exposure there and probably is another strategic reduction. All that, it's a little bit more tactical.

Bob在上一通電話會議也談過，Michael也談過。是娛樂產業真的感覺出現了典範轉移，正在遠離南加州，讓人覺得那些就業驅動因素已不如我們最初做投資時所預期的那樣。另外還有一部分是西雅圖市中心。那裡同樣有一些優勢，也一直在斷斷續續地復甦，但我們在那裡的曝險相當多，可能也是另一個策略性降低的方向。總之，這些更偏向戰術性的調整。

And I guess I'll give it to Bob to talk about that.

我想我把問題交給Bob來談談。

Yeah. I mean it really is an overall portfolio strategy approach, really taking an integrated approach to that at the asset level. So we integrate our capital with our disposition and acquisition kind of mindset. So we underwrite every single asset. I just actually went through this exercise with the team because if you're not selling, you're buying.

是的。我的意思是，這確實是一種整體投資組合策略的方法，真正以資產層級採取整合式的做法。因此，我們把資本配置與資產處分及收購的思維整合在一起。所以我們會對每一項資產進行承作評估（underwrite）。我其實剛和團隊做了這個練習，因為如果你不在賣，你就是在買。

And so we integrate that into our capital plans. We look at what the asset. We make an assessment of what we think the asset performance is going to be going forward. We compare that against our cost of capital, and we decide what can we do about that? What levers do we have?

因此我們把這也納入我們的資本計畫。我們會看這項資產的狀況。我們會評估我們認為該資產未來的表現會如何。我們把它與我們的資金成本做比較，然後決定我們能做些什麼？我們有哪些槓桿可以運用？

So in some instances, that can mean on a specific asset, we're going to invest that value-added renovation capital. We're doing $90 million of that this year, and we'll get a return that will compensate the shareholders. And in other cases, we see that, that's not an option. And so therefore, we look to sell that in the market when the market allows and redeploy that in something that's more accretive.

所以在某些情況下，這可能意味著針對特定資產，我們會投入增值型翻新資本支出。我們今年會做 9,000 萬美元的這類投資，並取得能夠回饋股東的報酬。而在其他情況下，我們看到那樣做不是選項。因此，我們就會在市場允許時於市場上出售，並把資本重新部署到更具增益（accretive）的標的上。

Okay. And then the second question is regarding the stock buybacks, you guys before, have done developer equity programs where you fund a third-party deal, you get fees along the way, et cetera. How is that looking as an opportunity to put capital out, especially if you think about derisking to wholly owned development? How is that looking today versus just straight buying back your stock?

好的。第二個問題是關於庫藏股回購。你們之前做過開發商股權（developer equity）計畫，也就是你們出資給第三方交易，過程中收取費用等等。把資本投出去的機會現在看起來如何，特別是如果你們考慮把風險降低到全資持有的開發？相較於直接回購自家股票，今天看起來如何？

Yes. I want to draw a distinction. It's been pretty uncommon, Alex, for us to do any kind of investment in development where we don't have a clear path to ownership, like all our deals, the two new ones we did, they do have partners in them. But I mean, we have the right and expect to own those assets. It's all been pretty infrequent in my career here where we funded like some of our peers do, a program where it's just funding a development, but we don't have an expectation or a legal right to own it somewhere in the process.

是的。我想先做個區分。Alex，我們很少做那種在開發投資上沒有明確取得所有權路徑的投資；像我們所有的交易——我們這次做的兩個新案——確實都有合作夥伴。但我的意思是，我們有權利且也預期會擁有那些資產。在我在這裡的職涯中，我們很少像一些同業那樣，去做一個只是出資開發、但在過程中我們既不預期也沒有法律權利取得所有權的計畫。

So I guess I'd say we don't do that mezzo lending or preferred equity or whatever you want to call it, in development very much. When we do it, whatever the structure is, whether it's called debt or equity, it's intended for us to own the property and there's a path to ownership.

所以我想我會說，我們不太做那種在開發上的夾層融資（mezzanine lending）或優先股權（preferred equity）——不管你想怎麼稱呼。我們若有做，不論結構被稱為債或股權，目的都是要讓我們最終擁有該物業，而且有一條取得所有權的路徑。

But I mean as far as the path to ownership, how does that look versus buybacks as you judge the math of doing a third-party development deal where you're going to own it versus buying back your stock?

但就取得所有權的路徑而言，當你們評估數學（報酬）時，做一個你們最終會擁有的第三方開發案，和回購自家股票相比，怎麼看？

Yes. I think that's a great question. Let's use the two development deals we started this quarter as an example. Obviously, the stocks thankfully run up a little over the last few days, but we are comparing the stock and our acquisition opportunities and development all the time. So why don't you talk, Bob, about those?

是的。我覺得這是個很好的問題。我們就用本季啟動的兩個開發案作為例子。顯然，過去幾天股價很幸運地上漲了一些，但我們一直都在比較股票、收購機會以及開發案。所以，Bob，你不如談談那些案子？

Yes. And so I think what you're highlighting, Alex, is that like in the new choice, I think the stock is obviously a really compelling choice. It's probably oftentimes the most complying choice. The next decision or the next those compelling choice is probably the development side today. Now you got to risk-adjust it, right?

好的。Alex，我想你強調的是，在新的選擇中，我認為股票顯然是一個非常有吸引力的選項。它可能在很多時候是最有吸引力的選項。接下來的決策、或下一個同樣有吸引力的選項，今天大概就是開發端。當然你必須做風險調整，對吧？

Because the risk and the development is different than the risk in the stabilized portfolio implied in the stock price. But like the two deals that we did that we announced or started this quarter, those deals generally on a current yield basis are closer, may not be exactly perfect with the implied cap rate of the stock. But then we're also looking at the IRR, right? And so we're looking at the IRR in the aggregate over time and comparing that to our WACC. And in the instance of the Atlanta deals, you're looking at delivering into -- in the one case, an asset that is in a very supply-constrained area that does exist even in Atlanta.

因為開發的風險不同於股價所隱含的、已穩定投資組合的風險。但像我們本季宣布或啟動的兩個案子，這些案子一般以當期收益率（current yield）來看，會更接近——可能不會完全精準對齊——股票所隱含的資本化率（cap rate）。但我們也會看 IRR（內部報酬率），對吧？因此我們看的是隨時間推移的整體 IRR，並把它與我們的 WACC（加權平均資本成本）比較。以亞特蘭大的案子為例，你會看到交付時點——其中一個案子——是在一個供給非常受限的區域，即使在亞特蘭大也確實如此。

And you're looking -- when you look at reasonable rent growth, we can generate a nice spread on an IRR basis without kind of making too crazy assumptions on rent growth or cap rate compression, we don't have any cap rate compression in our math, that is a premium to our WACC.

而且你會看到——當你假設合理的租金成長時，我們可以在 IRR 基礎上創造不錯的利差，而不需要對租金成長或資本化率壓縮做太激進的假設；我們的模型裡沒有任何 cap rate 壓縮，這個報酬高於我們的 WACC。

And so I think you're hitting on a point which is that the development side is probably right now the best other alternative outside of stock because your third choice, which is acquisitions are really tough on it relative to what private capital is underwriting. We're seeing private capital underwrite deals still in that [4.75% to 5.25%] spot rate and then IRRs that are probably in the seven handles, if that.

所以我認為你點出了一個重點：目前開發端大概是除股票之外最好的替代選項，因為你的第三個選項——也就是收購——相較於私募資本的承作假設（underwriting）而言真的很難做。我們看到私募資本仍在以大約 [4.75% 到 5.25%] 的即期資本化率（spot cap rate）承作交易，然後 IRR 可能也就 7% 左右，甚至不到。

I just want to add, Alex, because we don't primarily underwrite based on forward rent growth we're looking at spot construction costs against spot rents. And when we looked at the deal that's in Canton, Georgia, which is north of waste from downtown and Alpharetta, which is more of a close-in suburb our perspective was that based on the rents we see in the construction costs, we see the deal made sense on a risk-adjusted basis compared to the stock. It's tough. It's still below the yield the stock was trading at, at the time. So we acknowledge that.

我想補充一下，Alex，因為我們主要不是基於未來租金成長來承作，我們看的是即期建造成本對比即期租金。當我們看位於喬治亞州 Canton 的案子——在市中心以北、介於市中心與 Alpharetta（更靠近市區的郊區）之間——我們的觀點是，基於我們看到的租金與建造成本，這個案子在風險調整後相較於股票是合理的。這很不容易。在當時，它的收益率仍低於股票的交易收益率。所以我們也承認這點。

But you also got to look for places to have some growth capital and put some money to work that you think can grow over time. And we just felt like the Alpharetta deal really underwrote extremely well on a basis level. We just saw a deal trade in that submarket at a [4.5%] cap rate, and we're building now around to [6%]. So it's a little bit of triangulation, but the primary dependent thing is how to current construction costs compared to current rents.

但你也必須找一些地方放入成長型資本，讓資金投入你認為能隨時間成長的標的。而我們就是覺得 Alpharetta 的案子在基礎假設層面（basis level）承作得非常好。我們剛看到該子市場有一筆交易以 [4.5%] 的資本化率成交，而我們現在的建造大約在[6%] 左右。所以這有點像三角定位（triangulation），但最主要的依據是：當期建造成本相較於當期租金如何。

Julien Blouin with Goldman Sachs.

高盛的 Julien Blouin。

I guess as we think about the ramp in blends we saw from 1.5% in the first quarter of '26 to 3% in April. Was that improvement relatively similar in the established and expansion markets? Or was it definitely stronger established because of New York and San Francisco?

我想，當我們思考我們看到的 blended（綜合）爬升，從 26 年第一季的 1.5% 到 4 月的 3%。這個改善在成熟市場與擴張市場之間是否相對類似？還是成熟市場因為紐約和舊金山而明顯更強？

Julien, it's Michael. I think when I look at the quarter, I would tell you on a sequential basis, almost all of the markets showed around like a 200 basis point kind of improvement relative to the fourth quarter. I haven't really done that analysis for the April numbers. But I'm looking at it and just saying most of the markets, have shown that kind of sequential improvement. Obviously, San Francisco and New York are more like 400, 500 basis point sequential improvement on the new lease side.

Julien，我是 Michael。我認為如果我看這一季，我會告訴你，以季對季（sequential）的角度，幾乎所有市場相較第四季大概都有約 200 個基點左右的改善。我還沒有針對 4 月的數字做那個分析。但我看起來就是，大多數市場都呈現那種季對季的改善。顯然，舊金山和紐約在新租約端更像是 400、500 個基點的季對季改善。

Renewals have been pretty consistent, where almost all of the markets were equal to slightly better outside of like a DC and Boston, which were marginally kind of lower on a sequential basis. So I look at that growth to the April number and say it's kind of in line with what you would expect from a normal pricing trend seasonal curve. And like I said earlier on the call, right now, given our positioning, given where the occupancy is, our pricing trend has continued momentum, right? We're going to continue to see that accelerate through the second quarter.

續約一直相當一致，幾乎所有市場都持平到略有改善，只有像華府（DC）和波士頓在連續季度比較下略微偏低。所以我看從那個成長到4月的數字，會說它大致符合你對正常定價趨勢季節性曲線的預期。而且如我先前在電話會議上提到的，就目前而言，考量我們的定位、以及入住率所在水準，我們的定價趨勢仍持續有動能，對吧？我們會持續看到這個動能在第二季加速。

That's going to drive continual like materially different than my comments from prepared remarks about line with normal seasonal trends and which ones aren't.

這將會帶動持續性的（表現），在實質上與我在準備稿中關於「符合正常季節性趨勢」以及哪些不符合的評論並沒有不同。

Yes. Julien, it's a difference between absolute numbers, which are certainly better in the established markets than they are in the newer markets for us. But I think what Michael is signaling to you is just the momentum or trend line in the case of the established markets is becoming very positive and it's becoming less negative in these other markets, but the momentum track is the same, just the absolute numbers are still different, right?

是的。Julien，差異在於絕對數字；對我們而言，成熟市場的表現確實比新市場好。但我認為 Michael 想傳達的是：就成熟市場而言，動能或趨勢線正在變得非常正向；而在其他市場，負面程度正在減輕，但動能的走勢是一樣的，只是絕對數字仍然不同，對吧？

Yes. Got it. That makes sense. And then maybe moving over to Seattle. Are there any forward indicators you're looking at in Seattle that would indicate that it could follow San Francisco?

是的。了解。這很合理。那接著可能談到西雅圖。你們在西雅圖有在看哪些前瞻指標，會顯示它可能跟隨舊金山的走勢？

I mean, just so far, it seems like that market had a disproportionate amount of tech layoffs and sort of corporate roles without as much of the AI boost from company creation and job creation. The real-time rent data just continues to deteriorate in Seattle.

我的意思是，到目前為止，看起來那個市場承受了相對不成比例的科技裁員，以及一些企業職位的流失，但沒有同等程度來自 AI 的提振（例如公司成立與就業創造）。即時租金數據在西雅圖仍持續惡化。

Yes. I mean -- this is Michael. I think Julien, one of the positives that I guess I would point to is really the momentum that we see in Bellevue, Redmond. I mean if you look at some of the headlines around the office leasing activity, you see that kind of momentum kind of taking hold. You look at the migration pattern that I kind of mentioned earlier, where more folks are coming back into the market.

是的。我是 Michael。我想 Julien，我會指出的一個正面因素，主要是我們在 Bellevue、Redmond 看到的動能。如果你看一些關於辦公室租賃活動的新聞標題，你會看到那種動能正在形成。再看我先前提到的遷徙模式，有更多人正在回流到這個市場。

Now some of that could be from the Microsoft return-to-office kind of policy change early in the first quarter that we saw. But the setup feels right for that market to kind of show some of that momentum. And I think what we're feeling right now is we still have a little it of overhang from the supply that was delivered in 2025 that we're working through in the city. We also saw a reduction of inbound migration from foreign countries. So typically, Seattle is one of those markets that has a higher concentration of move-ins from kind of outside the US, so call it 4%, 5% of our move-ins during that quarter, we're running like 50% of that, Mark.

其中一部分可能來自我們在第一季初看到的 Microsoft 返辦政策調整。但整體條件看起來是對的，讓該市場能展現一些動能。而我認為我們目前的感受是：市區仍有一些來自2025年交付供給的壓力需要消化。我們也看到來自海外的淨遷入（inbound migration）減少。通常西雅圖是那種從美國境外搬入比例較高的市場，所以那一季我們的搬入中，來自境外的占比大概是4%、5%，但我們現在大約只有那個的一半，Mark。

So I look at this stuff and say, kind of longer term, I see the setup and I can see this kind of the recovery indicators kind of taking hold. We probably just need a couple more quarters to get through for it to really follow that trend that we're seeing in San Francisco.

所以我看這些因素會說，從較長期來看，我看到整體條件的鋪陳，也能看到復甦指標正在逐步成形。我們可能還需要再過幾個季度，才能讓它真正跟上我們在舊金山看到的那條趨勢。

John Pawlowski, Green Street.

John Pawlowski，Green Street。

Michael, I have a follow-up question on the new lease conversations. You mentioned the expectation for the full year is flat to maybe slightly negative now for the portfolio. Can you give us a sense for the goalposts? What range new lease growth rates will be for the best swath of the portfolio and the weakest?

Michael，我有一個關於新租約談判的追問。你提到對全年而言，整體投資組合的預期現在是持平到可能小幅為負。你能否讓我們了解一下目標區間？投資組合中表現最好的一段與最弱的一段，新租約成長率大概會落在什麼範圍？

Yeah. I don't really have that in front of me, John, for the whole portfolio. I guess what I would look at and say the newer markets are going to continue to still have negative new lease change, right? As Mark just alluded to a second and go off of my comments, we are seeing momentum. We are seeing improvement, but the absolute numbers are still negative.

好的。John，我手邊沒有整個投資組合的完整數字。但我會這樣看：較新的市場仍會持續出現新租約變動為負，對吧？如 Mark 剛才提到、也呼應我先前的評論，我們確實看到動能、也看到改善，但絕對數字仍然是負的。

And then you get into markets like San Francisco, right, where we're putting up kind of near 10% kind of change. So I think that's going to be a pretty wide spread when we end the year and looking at some of the newer markets as compared to like a San Francisco.

然後你再看像舊金山這樣的市場，我們的變動幅度接近10%。所以我認為到年底時，新市場相較於像舊金山這樣的市場，差距會相當大。

Okay. And then Bob, second question about just the disposition or that you have sold or you've potentially brought to market and then pulled off for the last six to nine months. Really the topic is perhaps widening cap rates for more CapEx-intensive lower-quality assets. So I guess, over the last, call it, six to nine months, have you had to change the types of assets you're actually selling? Has there been more re-trading when you bring properties to market and you're not getting a bit? Is there more churn in that disposition pipeline to still hit a reasonable cap rate on the dispose?

好的。那第二個問題是關於處分（disposition），也就是你們在過去六到九個月內已出售、或可能拿到市場上但又撤回的資產。主題可能是：對於需要較多資本支出（CapEx）、品質較低的資產，資本化率（cap rates）是否在擴大。所以我想問，過去大概六到九個月，你們是否不得不改變實際在賣的資產類型？當你們把物件推向市場但沒有拿到出價時，是否出現更多重新議價（re-trading）？在處分管線中是否有更多反覆（churn），以便仍能在處分時達到合理的資本化率？

Yes, I wouldn't say that there's any more churn than what we expected or certainly anything different than kind of what we saw last fall versus what we're seeing today. Some of these assets that we're taking to market are unique and they have different opportunities.

是的，我不會說反覆程度比我們預期的更多，或是有任何不同於我們去年秋天看到、相較於今天的情況。我們拿到市場上的一些資產是獨特的，且各自有不同的機會點。

So those opportunities may not -- we didn't -- like we didn't expect 20 people to show on under the tent, and we didn't get 20 people showing up under the tent because they have kind of the capital components or the value-add components or they may have retail, they may have ground leases or other things.

所以那些機會點可能不會——我們並沒有——例如我們不會期待有20個人都來「進帳篷」看案子，而實際上也沒有20個人都來，因為它們可能帶有資本結構的因素或增值（value-add）成分，或可能包含零售、地上權（ground leases）或其他因素。

So -- but I don't feel a difference in sentiment like six months ago relative to what we sit here today. Certainly, I think what has been consistent is that the smaller the size of the deal, meaning if it's in that $75 million to $150 million range, you get a lot more people showing up, right?

所以——但我不覺得相較於六個月前，現在的市場情緒有什麼差異。當然，我認為一直以來都很一致的是：交易規模越小，也就是在7,500萬到1.5億美元區間，你會看到更多人出現，對吧？

If you have a deal that is individually 150 or more, it just gets smaller, right? I think that's just -- that hasn't changed. But it feels the same, again, I haven't been doing this for that long, but it feels the same to me as it -- this right now the spring as it has last fall.

如果你有一筆單一交易在1.5億美元以上，參與的人就會變少，對吧？我認為這就是——這點沒有改變。但整體感覺一樣；同樣地，我做這件事的時間不算長，但對我而言，今年春天的感覺跟去年秋天很像。

And I might add, John, too, I think from a capital standpoint, right, I think the secured debt markets are still very supportive of these types of actions in multifamily. There's lots of capital available. So certainly no change from that end.

我也補充一下，John，從資金面來看，對吧？我認為以多戶住宅（multifamily）而言，擔保債務市場（secured debt markets）對這類行動仍非常支持。市場上有大量資金可用。所以從那個角度來看，當然沒有變化。

Yes. Okay. So you haven't got the sense that pricing like market pricing really hasn't deteriorated at all for maybe larger CapEx-intensive older properties?

是的。好的。所以你沒有感覺到，對於可能是規模較大、需要較多 CapEx 的老舊物件，市場定價其實完全沒有惡化？

I think that six or eight months ago, I think larger CapEx-intensive assets were very hard to sell, and I think they continue to be hard to sell today.

我認為在六到八個月前，大型、CapEx 密集型資產就非常難賣，而我認為今天仍然很難賣。

Nicholas Yulico, Scotiabank.

Nicholas Yulico，豐業銀行（Scotiabank）。

I know you guys got rid of the blended and new lease pricing by market, which I was sorry to see you go. But I wanted to see if you could maybe just give some commentary on Southern California how that's trending year-to-date on new and renewal leasing versus last year? Have you seen any improvement there?

我知道你們取消了按市場區分的綜合與新租約定價，我很遺憾看到你們不再提供。但我想看看你們是否可以就南加州今年迄今在新租與續租相較去年走勢，給一些評論？那邊有看到任何改善嗎？

Nick, this is Michael. So relative to Southern California for the first quarter, we're still seeing kind of negative new lease change and it's kind of most pronounced, I would say, in Los Angeles. And again, very consistent performance on the renewals. So I think for us, the SoCal portfolio continues to be the story around the Los Angeles kind of market. And sitting here today, right, I've got stable occupancy I've got a pricing trend curve.

Nick，我是Michael。就南加州第一季而言，我們仍看到新租約變動偏負，且我會說在洛杉磯最為明顯。續租表現則一如既往地穩定。所以對我們來說，南加州投資組合的重點仍在洛杉磯這個市場。以今天的情況來看，我的入住率穩定，也有一條定價趨勢曲線。

It's flat year-over-year. I've got less concessions right now in downtown and Korea Town, where we had some of that supply kind of pressure last year. So blends are starting to show some kind of positive momentum here, but it's less than what you normally would have expected. And I think last year, we started to feel some more of this pressure kind of more second quarter, third and fourth quarter. So relative to the first quarter, clearly, we see still some softening SoCal compared to last year.

年對年持平。目前在市中心與Koreatown（韓國城）的讓利（concessions）較少；去年那裡曾受到供給壓力。因此，綜合租金（blends）開始呈現一些正向動能，但低於你通常會預期的程度。而且我認為去年我們是在第二季、第三季與第四季更明顯感受到這些壓力。所以就第一季而言，很明顯我們仍看到南加州相較去年有些走弱。

But as we work our way through the balance of the year, just expect kind of moderate performance this year out of LA. We're not really seeing anything that's going to point to a robust recovery in pricing power.

但隨著我們走完今年剩餘期間，預期洛杉磯今年的表現大致是溫和的。我們並沒有看到任何跡象顯示定價能力會強勁復甦。

Okay. And then second question is, Mark. If we look at the multifamily sector, there's kind of a clustering of valuation for the stocks that are in your peer group. What I'm wondering is are you thinking about -- and I know you have -- there is a differentiated strategy here that maybe people don't sort of pay attention to. But are you and the Board, there are conversations to sort of go even more in terms of differentiation and strategy, whether it's investments, platform, sort of how you're managing the balance sheet that you guys are sort of focused on to sort of differentiate yourself versus the peer group?

好的。第二個問題是，Mark。如果我們看多戶住宅（multifamily）產業，你們同業群的股票估值似乎有聚集在一起的現象。我想問的是，你們是否在思考——我知道你們確實有——這裡有一個差異化策略，可能市場並不太注意。但你和董事會是否有在討論，進一步加大差異化與策略的力度，不論是在投資、平台，或是你們如何管理資產負債表等面向，來讓你們相較同業更具差異？

Yes. Thanks for that question. We are -- the Board, the management team is always engaged on strategy. It's a topic every meeting. It's a topic between meetings.

是的。謝謝這個問題。我們——董事會與管理團隊一直都在投入策略討論。每次會議都會談到。會議與會議之間也會談。

I think real estate expert investors, of which there used to be more than there are now understood the differences between the big six or seven apartment companies. I mean we do have a different strategy. We're more urban-focused, more less development focused, we're more operationally focused on our kind of excellence and investment in our operations.

我認為房地產專業投資人——以前比現在多——理解六、七家大型公寓公司的差異。我們確實有不同的策略。我們更聚焦都會區、較少聚焦開發，更著重營運面，強調我們在營運上的卓越與對營運的投資。

So I think people that are experts in the area know the difference between us and others. I think the generalist investors, and of course, the index funds don't. And I think it's a little bit hard to know how you can break through that, except I don't know, by some really more dramatic step. But I do think dedicated investors know the difference between us and our peers. And I think more generalist investors probably don't.

所以我認為該領域的專家知道我們與其他公司的差異。我認為一般型投資人，當然還有指數基金，並不清楚。而我覺得要突破這點有點難，除非採取某種更戲劇性的作法。但我確實認為專注型投資人知道我們與同業的差異。而更一般型的投資人可能不知道。

Jamie Feldman, Wells Fargo.

Jamie Feldman，富國銀行（Wells Fargo）。

Great. I guess here's an opportunity to talk about your operations. So we haven't really talked about the expense side of things. Can you talk about a couple of things here. Number one, the insurance renewal that I think was in March, how that played out?

很好。我想這是個談談你們營運的機會。我們其實還沒怎麼談到費用端。你能談幾件事嗎？第一，應該是在3月的保險續保，結果如何？

And how that looks versus your guidance? And then just energy costs. Is there anything that's changed your outlook on the expense side given where energy costs are going? Or is there anything you're doing to mitigate expenses? Maybe just talk through that?

這跟你們的指引相比如何？另外是能源成本。在能源成本走勢下，費用端的展望有任何改變嗎？或你們有做什麼來降低費用？可以請你們說明一下嗎？

Or if there's any other expense line items that are meaningfully different than your initial outlook or that you want people to focus on how you're managing them?

或者是否還有其他費用科目，與你們最初的展望相比有顯著差異，或你希望大家關注你們如何管理的？

Yes. Thanks for the question. So I'd say maybe I start with the insurance, you're right. We did see -- actually we had our property insurance premiums. They have come down, which we actually viewed as an opportunity to buy some additional coverage.

是的。謝謝提問。我想先從保險談起，你說得對。我們確實看到——其實我們的財產保險保費。已經下降了，我們也把這視為一個機會去購買一些額外的保障。

So I think that hedges us against kind of what we've been seeing in annual casualty loss expenses over the last few years. And so I think while property premiums were coming down, we also have seen the offset being general liability premiums have increased as well as some of the general liability expenses that run through our same-store ops.

我認為這能對沖我們過去幾年在年度意外損失（casualty loss）費用上所看到的情況。因此，雖然財產保費在下降，我們也看到另一端的抵銷：一般責任險保費上升，且一些一般責任相關費用也透過我們的同店營運（same-store ops）入帳。

So I think putting that all together, the 4.5% quarter-over-quarter increase we had in the first quarter, that's not unexpected. But -- and was anticipated in our guidance. As far as energy, I would say utilities were up a little bit higher than we probably thought for the year a little bit.

所以把這些合在一起看，我們第一季季對季增加4.5%，這並不意外。而且——也已反映在我們的指引中。至於能源，我會說公用事業費（utilities）比我們原先對全年預期的略高一些。

And a lot of that results, I think, from one, the number of storms we had early in the year in the Northeast in particular. Obviously, there's a lot of noise and energy costs just generally across the board and electricity and gas were certainly impacted for us in the quarter. We tend to hedge as much as we can. So there's only a small amount that we can hedge in the market. But to the extent we can, we are hedging energy prices.

我認為其中很大一部分原因是，第一，年初東北部尤其出現多場風暴。顯然，整體能源成本本來就有很多雜訊，電力與天然氣在本季確實對我們造成影響。我們會盡可能進行避險。因此在市場上我們能避險的比例其實不大。但在可行範圍內，我們正在對能源價格進行避險。

But I'd also say the flip side of higher utility cost being up is on the revenue side, we were able to have higher fees. And you noticed our other income was up about 60 basis points of contribution in the quarter. So that offset a little bit of the higher increases in expenses.

但我也想說，公用事業成本上升的另一面是在收入端，我們能收取較高的費用。你也注意到我們的其他收入在本季的貢獻提高了約60個基點。因此多少抵銷了費用較高的增幅。

Sorry. The one thing I was going to add, Jamie, is on the capital side. So we have a number of capital sustainability-driven capital projects. focused on reducing consumption because that's really the lever that you can manage the best, right? Because it's macroeconomic drivers will drive the utility costs.

抱歉。Jamie，我想補充的是資本支出端。我們有多個以永續為導向的資本專案，重點在降低耗用量，因為那才是你最能掌控的槓桿，對吧？因為公用事業成本會受到總體經濟因素驅動。

We have a number of projects underway. But to be honest with you, the rise in prices also led us to re-underwrite other projects that may not have otherwise hurdled in terms of what our capital returns would have been but now do. And so we have looked at -- we did a big exercise of looking at accelerating those to manage that both for our own P&L, but also for our residents overall. So we're applying the operational excellence that you've seen in Michael's world just across the platform in order to keep those costs down as much as we can.

我們有多個專案正在進行中。但坦白說，價格上升也促使我們重新評估（re-underwrite）其他專案；這些專案原本在資本報酬門檻上可能無法達標，但現在可以了。因此我們做了一個大型盤點，評估加速推進這些專案，以管理我們自己的損益表（P&L），也為了整體住戶。所以我們把你在Michael所負責的領域看到的營運卓越，擴展到整個平台，盡可能把這些成本壓低。

Yes. And Jamie, this is Michael. The only thing I would add there is we do have an energy conservation checklist. So our on-site teams have done a tremendous job every day showing up, going through that checklist and looking for areas of opportunity to reduce the overall consumption. We measure the consumption.

是的。Jamie，我是Michael。我唯一想補充的是，我們確實有一份節能檢查清單。因此，我們的現場團隊每天都非常出色地到場，逐項檢視那份清單，並尋找可降低整體耗用量的機會。我們會衡量耗用量。

We kind of share and highlight and spotlight where we're seeing those successes. And it doesn't take much, right? That little bit of focus of turning down the temperatures in the hallways or common areas by 1 or 2 degrees, starts to show up in some of the bills. It has a lag effect. But clearly, we have the right mindset in place to mitigate as much of the consumption risk as we can.

我們會分享、強調並聚焦我們看到的那些成果。而且其實不需要做太多，對吧？只要稍微專注一點，例如把走廊或公共區域的溫度調低1到2度，就開始會反映在部分帳單上。這會有些滯後效應。但很明顯，我們已具備正確的心態，盡可能降低我們能控制的耗用風險。

Okay. That's very helpful color. And then we noticed your leasing and advertising is up pretty meaningfully year-over-year. I think it's over 20%, higher use of interactive marketing. Can you just talk about something -- is there anything changing on the AI side?

好的。這些補充資訊很有幫助。另外我們注意到，你們的招租與廣告費用年增幅相當明顯。我想超過20%，互動式行銷的使用也更高。你能談談——在AI方面是否有任何變化嗎？

Are you using more resources to optimize your appearance in AI searches? Is there anything to read into that data? And if there is, what are the -- how is it going?

你們是否投入更多資源來優化在AI搜尋中的曝光？這些數據有沒有什麼值得解讀的地方？如果有，目前情況如何——進展怎麼樣？

Yes, maybe I'll start -- sure, I'll start, Jamie, just on the cost side. I'd say it's nothing that we didn't expect. I mean, as Michael talked about, we've got some of our technology innovations that are rolling through that. I would also say specifically to that line item in the quarter, we did have an outsized increase from a write-off of a broker commission we took in the first quarter related to our non resi portfolio.

是的，也許我先開始——當然，我先從成本面談起，Jamie。我會說這沒有超出我們的預期。如Michael提到的，我們有一些技術創新正在逐步導入並反映在其中。我也想特別指出，本季該費用項目中，我們因第一季針對非住宅投資組合所做的一筆經紀佣金沖銷（write-off），導致增幅偏大。

So when a tenant vacates early, we will add off the full amount remaining on the amortized brokerage fees, which we did at three retail properties in the quarter. So that was contributing a little bit to the higher number. But otherwise, it was kind of in line with what we were thinking.

因此，當租戶提前退租時，我們會把剩餘尚未攤銷的經紀費用全額沖銷；本季我們在三個零售物業就做了這件事。所以這也讓數字看起來高了一點。但除此之外，基本上與我們原先的預期一致。

Yeah. And then I think just specific to AI, I mean, I do think the industry is changing very quickly and the way that consumers or prospects are finding people by leveraging some of the LLM models that are out there is going to change kind of the ILS environment. Our team is very focused right now on trying to figure out ways to become relevant in that kind of search optimization. Haven't really seen anything take hold and clearly not a driver to the expense that Bret just alluded to, but it's something that the team is very focused on. And we do think over time is actually going to reduce kind of the dependency and overall reduce the L&A expense.

是的。至於AI，我確實認為產業變化非常快，消費者或潛在客戶利用市面上一些LLM模型來尋找資訊的方式，將會改變整個ILS（網路招租平台）環境。我們團隊目前非常專注在找出方法，讓我們在那種搜尋最佳化環境中變得更相關、更容易被找到。目前還沒有看到什麼真正成形；而且很明顯，這也不是Bret剛提到那筆費用的驅動因素，但這確實是團隊高度關注的事情。我們也認為，隨著時間推進，這其實會降低依賴度，並整體降低招租與廣告（L&A）費用。

Okay. Do you think it can become a strategic advantage? Or does it level the playing field?

好的。你認為這能成為策略優勢嗎？還是會讓競爭回到同一起跑線？

No. I think there's absolutely ways to become more relevant in that environment. And I think the folks that are focused on it and put the right resources to it, will have a strategic advantage.

不。我認為在那樣的環境中，絕對有方法讓自己更具相關性。而且我認為，真正專注於此並投入適當資源的人，會擁有策略優勢。

Michael Goldsmith, UBS.

Michael Goldsmith，瑞銀（UBS）。

This is Ami on with Michael. I was curious, how much of an impact does burning off of concessions have on your blended rent spreads? So are your blended rent spreads artificially boosted by concession burn off?

我是Ami，和Michael一起在線上。我想了解，優惠（concessions）逐步到期／消退（burn off）對你們的綜合租金價差（blended rent spreads）影響有多大？也就是說，你們的綜合租金價差是否因優惠消退而被人為墊高？

They were always reported on the same basis, so they're always net. So they don't -- it's marked. They don't change from like one quarter, we reported it with concessions in the next quarter without. So obviously, getting rid of concessions is the beginning of that continuum of improvement, right? You get occupancy, you get confident you take concessions away, then you move up base rents and that it finally leads through the rents or to same-store revenue. So I guess I'd say it's on the continuum. But because we didn't change the basis of calculation, I don't see how that could be true.

我們一直都是用相同基礎來揭露，所以一向是以淨額（net）口徑呈現。所以它們不會——是有標示的。不會出現像是某一季我們把優惠算進去、下一季又不算的情況。當然，取消優惠是改善連續體的起點，對吧？你先提升入住率，建立信心後拿掉優惠，接著再提高基本租金，最後才會反映到租金水準或同店營收。所以我會說它是在那個改善過程中。但因為我們沒有改變計算基礎，我看不出為什麼會是那樣。

Okay. So not a material impact. And then I guess just to touch on the record that you're monitoring. We know Massachusetts is up. Are there any others that you're monitoring closely?

好的。所以影響不大。另外我想再提一下你們正在監控的紀錄／議題。我們知道麻薩諸塞州的情況升溫。還有其他你們也在密切關注的嗎？

Well, Massachusetts is the area of primary focus for us. It's likely to go to the voters. And I think the industry has mobilized just like it was in California to make the same arguments about the industry being more useful creating supply and at this rent control activity as a disincentive. There are a couple of deals we were looking at in Massachusetts to start building that we stopped. And I'll tell you that the two deals we are almost done building right now, we might have thought about them differently as well.

嗯，麻薩諸塞州是我們主要關注的區域。它很可能會交由選民表決。我認為產業已經動員起來，就像當年在加州一樣，提出同樣的論點：這個產業在增加供給上更有助益，而租金管制行為會形成抑制投資的誘因。我們原本在麻州看過幾個準備開工的案子，後來我們停止了。我也可以告訴你，我們現在幾乎快完工的兩個案子，如果當時知道會這樣，我們可能也會用不同方式來評估。

So it's a very negative proposal for housing supply and long-term affordability. There is a measure in DC we're watching closely as well that will freeze rents for two years. A lot of our DC portfolio is already rent controlled. So it's a little bit of a different and less meaningful impact directly on us.

所以這是一項對住宅供給與長期可負擔性非常不利的提案。我們也在密切關注華盛頓特區（DC）的一項措施，該措施將凍結租金兩年。我們在DC的投資組合有很大一部分本來就受租金管制。因此，對我們的直接影響會有點不同，也相對沒那麼重大。

But again, it's a hard place to do business. The market already knows about this. It's already harder to sell assets in the District of Columbia. So again, I guess the theme I'd give you is capital is sensitive to regulation. And when you do this and deny returns, you're going to have less investment in worse affordability.

但再說一次，那是一個很難做生意的地方。市場其實已經知道這件事。在哥倫比亞特區出售資產也已經變得更困難。所以我想給你的主軸是：資本對監管非常敏感。當你這樣做、否定合理報酬時，投資就會變少，而可負擔性反而會更差。

And I think a lot of smart policymakers like Governor Healy in Massachusetts already know that. So we're going to be hopeful. But Massachusetts is the main show this year.

而且我認為，很多聰明的政策制定者——例如麻薩諸塞州的Healy州長——其實早就知道這一點。所以我們會抱持希望。但今年的重頭戲還是麻薩諸塞州。

Adam Kramer, Morgan Stanley.

Adam Kramer，摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）。

Maybe a little bit more of a philosophical question. But just with turnover rates sort of as low as they are and even with all of the supply that we've had the last few years seeming to stay really low. Wondering sort of how you view that, right? I recognize that from a same-store NOI perspective is benefit from reduced R&M cost. But just from renewals versus new lease growth perspective, wondering how you see the lack of mobility within the housing ecosystem currently sort of benefit on the renewal, but maybe hurt you a little bit on the new lease side? Or am I thinking about it incorrectly there?

也許這是一個比較偏哲學層面的問題。但在換租率（turnover rates）維持在這麼低的水準、而且即便過去幾年供給增加不少，看起來仍然維持很低的情況下，想請教你們怎麼看待這件事？我理解，從同店NOI的角度來看，換租率降低有助於降低維修與保養（R&M）成本。但從續租（renewals）相對於新租（new lease）租金成長的角度來看，想了解你們如何看待目前住宅生態系中流動性不足：它在續租端可能有利，但在新租端是否可能對你們有些不利？還是我這樣想其實不太正確？或者我在這裡的理解有誤？

Adam, it's Mark. I'm going to try to answer. We've been reading articles, various bank research shops about less labor mobility, and that's been a trend in the US, people are moving less frequently. Interestingly, it does look like Gen Z, not surprisingly, younger people move more often and that higher wage folks move more often that describes our demographic pretty well. I think for the country overall, growth has benefited by people moving to where the jobs are.

Adam，我是 Mark。我來嘗試回答。我們一直在閱讀一些文章，以及各家銀行研究機構的報告，內容提到勞動力流動性降低，而這在美國一直是一個趨勢，人們搬遷的頻率變少了。有趣的是，看起來 Z 世代（Gen Z）不意外地更常搬家，而高薪族群也更常搬家，這與我們的客群輪廓相當吻合。我認為就整個國家而言，成長一直受惠於人們搬到有工作機會的地方。

So I think less labor and mobility, less geographic mobility is less positive for the US growth rate overall. But our group of folks will move around the country at their age to find opportunity and maybe aren't quite as tied down as older generations are by family or other considerations. So I think overall, less geographic mobility is bad for the country. But I think for our demographic, we just haven't seen it.

所以我認為勞動力流動性降低、地理流動性降低，對美國整體成長率而言是比較不利的。但我們這群人在這個年齡層，會在全國各地移動以尋找機會，可能也不像年長世代那樣，因家庭或其他因素而被綁住。因此我認為整體來說，地理流動性降低對國家是不好的。但就我們的客群而言，我們確實還沒有看到這種情況。

And you heard Michael talk about San Francisco. We see the influx and we -- at our Investor Day last year, we talked about New York, which has lost people for a while. And -- but yet Manhattan is doing great for our demographic, and you see that in our occupancy numbers. So I think there's a big overall theme of it being a little bit of a negative. But for us, it's generally been either neutral or a bit of a positive because our demographic is more mobile still.

而你也聽到 Michael 談到舊金山。我們看到人口流入，而且——在我們去年投資人日（Investor Day）時，我們談到紐約，紐約一段時間以來一直在流失人口。但是——曼哈頓對我們的客群而言表現仍然非常好，你可以從我們的入住率數據看出來。所以我認為整體的大主題是：這多少有點偏負面。但對我們來說，整體上不是中性就是略偏正面，因為我們的客群仍然更具流動性。

That's great color. And then maybe just a little bit of different question. Just wondering about sort of the Sunbelt recovery. So a little bit of a crystal ball question. I know it's difficult.

這些說明很有幫助。接著也許換個角度問一個不同的問題。想請教一下關於陽光帶（Sunbelt）的復甦。這有點像水晶球問題。我知道這很難。

But I guess when you sort of sit here look at as what the supply forecast is for the Sunbelt for your expansion markets, sort of how do you think about sort of the pace of recovery there? Does new lease growth? Could it get positive later this year? Is that more of a 2027 story? I recognize there's nuances by market as well, Austin probably being the softest fundamentals. But just -- yes, I wonder sort of recovering the Sunbelt, the latest thoughts on timing there.

但我想問的是，當你坐在這裡看你們擴張市場的陽光帶供給預測時，你們如何看待那邊的復甦速度？新簽租約（new lease）的租金成長，今年稍晚有可能轉正嗎？還是要到 2027 年才會發生？我也理解各市場之間有差異，例如奧斯汀的基本面可能是最疲弱的。但就是——是的，我想了解一下陽光帶復甦的時間點，你們最新的看法是什麼。

It's Mark again. And if there's something, Michael, on stat, he can jump in here. But I think we need to see concessions go down. That's what we are seeing, in fact, in Atlanta and just occupancy firming and concessions, and that will be the indicator that rents will recover. The setup in all those markets are markets, which again, are just Dallas, Denver and Atlanta with Austin, a laggard, those all have decent forward setups.

我又是 Mark。如果 Michael 有任何即時的統計數據（stat），他也可以在這裡補充。但我認為我們需要看到租賃優惠（concessions）下降。事實上，我們在亞特蘭大已經看到這種情況——入住率走穩、租賃優惠下降，而這將是租金回升的指標。這些市場的格局——再次強調，就是達拉斯、丹佛與亞特蘭大，奧斯汀相對落後——這些市場的前瞻條件都還不錯。

We just need more job growth there than anywhere else because we have more supply there than anywhere else. So I think they are more sensitive to jobs, and we've said that a few times. I don't know how many jobs you need in the market like DC, new jobs where there's just going to be so much less supply. So I think those are higher beta markets, and they do have upside. And I think in some -- maybe a year or so, we'll be talking about that second derivative really inflecting up in those markets more than at this point.

我們只是需要那裡的就業成長要比其他地方更強，因為那裡的供給也比其他地方更多。所以我認為它們對就業更敏感，我們也提過好幾次。我不確定像華府（DC）這樣的市場需要多少新增工作機會，因為那裡的新增供給會少很多。所以我認為那些是 beta 較高的市場，確實有上行空間。而我想在某些——也許一年左右之後——我們會談到那些市場的二階變化（second derivative）相較於目前會更明顯地向上拐點。

But what we really see is a bit of a slow recovery with Atlanta in the pole position for us in Austin at the rear.

但我們真正看到的是復甦偏慢，其中亞特蘭大對我們而言處於領先位置，而奧斯汀則在最後。

Omotayo Okusanya, Deutsche Bank.

Omotayo Okusanya，德意志銀行（Deutsche Bank）。

Yes. The other income line item this quarter, kind of some strong results coming out of that. Just curious if that's just really being driven more by just expense reimbursement because you have higher occupancy, whether it's other ancillary income sources there that are more sustainable anything onetime in there? Just curious about that line item and kind of what we can expect from it going forward.

是的。本季的其他收入（other income）項目，表現相當強勁。想請教這是否主要是因為入住率較高而帶動費用補償（expense reimbursement），還是有其他更可持續的附屬收入來源？其中是否有任何一次性（one-time）因素？想了解一下這個科目，以及未來我們可以如何預期它的走勢。

Yes, sure. This is Bret. I said -- as I mentioned earlier, I think we saw, as you noted, the higher rubs income a little bit. We said bad debt was better this quarter by 10 basis points. And then the last thing I'd say is we did see some positive trends in storage and some of the on-site ancillary charges that we've been generating, we're working on as long as -- as well as the continued rollout of the bulk WiFi program from last year.

好的，當然。我是 Bret。我說——如我先前提到的，我認為我們看到（如你所指出）RUBS 收入（rubs income）略有提高。我們也提到本季壞帳（bad debt）改善了 10 個基點。最後我想說的是，我們也看到儲物（storage）以及一些我們正在推動的現場附加收費（on-site ancillary charges）出現正向趨勢，同時也延續去年開始的整體 WiFi（bulk WiFi）方案的持續推廣。

This concludes the question-and-answer portion of today's call. I would like to turn the call over to Mark Parrell for any additional or closing comments.

今天電話會議的問答環節到此結束。我想把電話會議交回給 Mark Parrell，請他做任何補充或結語。

Thank you all for your time today and for your interest in Equity Residential.

感謝各位今天撥冗參與，也感謝各位對 Equity Residential 的關注。

This concludes today's call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect

今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位的參與。您現在可以掛線