Extra Space Storage Inc. (EXR) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining us, and welcome to Extra Space Storage Inc. Q1 2026 earnings call. (Operator Instructions)

各位好。感謝各位加入，歡迎參加 Extra Space Storage Inc. 2026 年第一季財報電話會議。(接線員指示)

I will now hand the conference over to Jared Conley, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

現在我將把會議交給投資人關係副總裁 Jared Conley。請開始。

Thanks, Karen. Welcome to Extra Space Storage's first quarter 2026 earnings call. In addition to our press release, we have furnished unaudited supplemental financial information on our website.

謝謝你，Karen。歡迎參加 Extra Space Storage 2026 年第一季財報電話會議。除新聞稿外，我們也已在官網提供未經審計的補充財務資訊。

Please remember that management's prepared remarks and answers to your questions may contain forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. Actual results could differ materially from those stated or implied by our forward-looking statements due to risks and uncertainties associated with the company's business. These forward-looking statements are qualified by the cautionary statements contained in the company's latest filings with the SEC, which we encourage our listeners to review. Forward-looking statements represent management's estimates as of today, April 29, 2026. The company assumes no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements because of changing market conditions or other circumstances after the date of this conference call.

請記得，管理層的事先準備發言及對各位提問的回答，可能包含《私人證券訴訟改革法》所定義的前瞻性陳述。由於與公司業務相關的風險與不確定性，實際結果可能與我們前瞻性陳述中所述或所暗示者有重大差異。這些前瞻性陳述受公司近期向美國證券交易委員會（SEC）提交文件中的警示性聲明所限制，我們鼓勵聽眾加以查閱。前瞻性陳述代表管理層截至今日（2026 年 4 月 29 日）的估計。公司不承擔在本次電話會議日期之後，因市場狀況變化或其他情況而修訂或更新任何前瞻性陳述的義務。

I would like to now turn the time over to Joe Margolis, Chief Executive Officer.

現在我想把時間交給執行長 Joe Margolis。

Thanks, Jared, and thank you, everyone, for joining today's call. We are pleased to report first quarter core FFO of $2.04 per share, up 2% year-over-year. Our solid performance demonstrates the strength and resilience of our diversified portfolio and best-in-class platform as we navigate an improving operating environment. Operationally, we delivered positive same-store revenue growth of 1.7%, which exceeded our internal projections. We ended the quarter with same-store occupancy at 93% compared to 93.2% in the prior year, with the year-over-year occupancy delta improving 50 basis points since year-end.

謝謝你，Jared，也感謝各位參加今天的電話會議。我們很高興報告第一季核心 FFO 為每股 2.04 美元，年增 2%。在營運環境改善之際，我們穩健的表現展現了多元化投資組合與同級最佳平台的實力與韌性。在營運面，我們達成同店營收正成長 1.7%，高於內部預估。本季同店入住率為 93%，相較去年同期 93.2%；自年末以來，年對年入住率差距改善了 50 個基點。

We did this while continuing to achieve positive rate growth to new customers during the quarter, and our systems continue to optimize for total revenue with no preference for move-in rate or occupancy. We are seeing encouraging broad-based revenue improvement across our markets, driven primarily by declining new supply. The sequential new customer rate gains we have been achieving over recent quarters are now translating into revenue growth. These positive operating trends position us well as we enter the leasing season.

同時，我們在本季持續對新客戶實現正向的租金費率成長，而我們的系統仍以總營收最佳化為目標，並不偏好入住時費率或入住率。我們看到各市場出現令人鼓舞、廣泛性的營收改善，主要由新供給下降所帶動。我們近幾季持續取得的新客戶費率逐季提升，如今正轉化為營收成長。這些正向的營運趨勢，使我們在進入租賃旺季時具備良好態勢。

Our diversified external growth platform continues to be effective across multiple channels. We continue to review a high volume of acquisition opportunities while maintaining a disciplined approach given current asset pricing relative to our cost of capital. We are projecting $200 million in total acquisitions for 2026, under the assumption that we will close materially more in total transactions, primarily in asset-light joint venture structures. Our bridge loan program continues to perform well, maintaining an average balance of approximately $1.5 billion in Q1 2026. This program not only generates attractive interest income, but also serves to expand our management business and provides an opportunity for future acquisitions.

我們多元化的外部成長平台，持續在多個管道展現成效。在目前資產定價相對於我們資金成本的情況下，我們仍以審慎紀律的方式，持續評估大量收購機會。我們預估 2026 年總收購金額為 2 億美元，前提是假設我們將完成顯著更多的整體交易，且主要採用輕資產的合資架構。我們的過橋貸款計畫持續表現良好，2026 年第一季平均餘額約 15 億美元。該計畫不僅帶來具吸引力的利息收入，也有助於擴大我們的管理業務，並提供未來收購的機會。

Our third-party management platform added 84 stores in the quarter with net growth of 60 stores, bringing our total managed portfolio to 1,916 stores. The consistent demand for our management services demonstrates the value we deliver through superior property performance, operational expertise and our data and technology platforms. Overall, we are encouraged by our first quarter performance. The sequential improvement across our portfolio gives us confidence in our ability to capitalize on continued supply moderation and strengthening fundamentals as we progress through 2026.

我們的第三方管理平台本季新增 84 家門店，淨增加 60 家，使受管理的總組合達到 1,916 家門店。對我們管理服務的持續需求，展現了我們透過更優異的物業表現、營運專業能力，以及數據與科技平台所提供的價值。整體而言，我們對第一季表現感到鼓舞。我們投資組合的逐季改善，使我們對於在 2026 年推進過程中，掌握供給放緩與基本面轉強的機會更具信心。

I will now turn the time over to our CFO, Jeff Norman.

現在我把時間交給我們的財務長 Jeff Norman。

Thanks, Joe, and hello, everyone. As Joe mentioned, we are off to a good start in 2026, and we are especially pleased with our store-level operating performance. Same-store revenue accelerated 130 basis points from 0.4% in the fourth quarter of 2025 to 1.7% in the first quarter of 2026, and same-store NOI growth improved 110 basis points from 0.1% to 1.2%.

謝謝你，Joe，各位好。如 Joe 所提到，我們在 2026 年有個良好開局，且我們對門店層級的營運表現尤其滿意。同店營收成長自 2025 年第四季的 0.4% 加速 130 個基點至 2026 年第一季的 1.7%，同店 NOI 成長也自 0.1% 改善 110 個基點至 1.2%。

We are seeing the benefit of multiple quarters of positive new customer rate growth begin to flow through to revenue growth, and our pricing models continue to utilize rate, occupancy and marketing spend to drive total revenue. We also had solid expense control, with all categories in line with our estimates, outside of utilities and repairs and maintenance, which ran higher than expected primarily due to snow removal and other weather-related items. Excluding the above budgeted portion of weather-related expenditures, total year-over-year expense growth would have been 1.5%.

我們看到多個季度的新客戶費率正成長所帶來的效益，開始反映到營收成長上；而我們的定價模型仍持續運用費率、入住率與行銷支出來推動總營收。我們在費用控管方面也表現穩健，各項費用類別均符合我們的估計，唯公用事業費與修繕維護費高於預期，主要因除雪及其他與天候相關的項目所致。若排除上述已編列預算的天候相關支出部分，總費用年對年成長將為 1.5%。

Our ancillary businesses also delivered strong performance during the quarter. Management fee and other income grew over 9% year-over-year, reflecting our expanding third-party management platform. Net tenant insurance growth was over 5%, and our bridge loan program produced steady fee and interest income. All components of our diversified revenue model are performing well and contributing to our overall results. Our balance sheet remains in excellent shape, with 83% of our total debt at fixed interest rates, a figure that increases to 93% on an effective basis when accounting for our variable rate loan receivables. Our weighted average interest rate stands at 4.3%, and we currently have approximately $2 billion in capacity on our revolving lines of credit, providing us with strong liquidity and plenty of growth capital.

我們的附屬業務在本季也交出強勁表現。管理費及其他收入年對年成長超過 9%，反映我們持續擴大的第三方管理平台。租戶保險淨成長超過 5%，而我們的過橋貸款計畫帶來穩定的費用與利息收入。我們多元化營收模式的各個組成部分均表現良好，並對整體成果有所貢獻。我們的資產負債表仍維持極佳狀態，總負債中有 83% 為固定利率；若將我們的浮動利率放款應收款納入考量，以有效基礎計算該比例提高至 93%。我們的加權平均利率為 4.3%，目前循環信用額度尚有約 20 億美元可用額度，提供我們強勁的流動性與充足的成長資本。

We are maintaining our full year 2026 core FFO guidance range of $8.05 to $8.35 per share, as well as our same-store performance outlook. While our Q1 performance exceeded internal expectations and we're encouraged by the sequential improvements we're observing, we believe maintaining our current guidance range appropriately balances the positive momentum we're experiencing with the uncertainties that remain in the broader macroeconomic environment. We will revisit our annual guidance with our second quarter earnings after the leasing season has played out.

我們維持 2026 年全年核心 FFO 指引區間為每股 8.05 至 8.35 美元，同時也維持同店表現展望。雖然第一季表現優於內部預期，且我們對所觀察到的逐季改善感到鼓舞，但我們認為維持目前指引區間，能在我們所經歷的正向動能與整體宏觀經濟環境仍存的不確定性之間取得適當平衡。在租賃旺季結束後，我們將於第二季財報時重新檢視年度指引。

In summary, we're encouraged by the acceleration in same-store NOI and the strong performance across all parts of our business, driving positive core FFO growth. The combination of our operational strength, talented team and diversified growth platform gives us confidence in our ability to continue delivering long-term shareholder value through 2026 and beyond.

總結來說，我們對同店 NOI 的加速成長以及公司各業務面向的強勁表現感到鼓舞，這些因素推動核心 FFO 正成長。我們的營運實力、優秀團隊與多元化成長平台相結合，使我們對於在 2026 年及其後持續為股東創造長期價值的能力充滿信心。

With that, operator, let's go ahead and open it up for questions.

接下來，接線員，讓我們開始進入問答。

(Operator Instructions) Michael Goldsmith, UBS.

(接線員指示) Michael Goldsmith，瑞銀（UBS）。

First question, positive move-in rates over the past year seemed to carry the same-store revenue growth to a much higher level in the first quarter with the same-store revenue growth of 1.7%. Now that move-in rates are moderating, should that weigh on same-store revenue growth for the balance of the year? And is that reflected in your same-store revenue growth guidance that implies moderation from here? Just trying to understand the impact of street rates flowing through the algorithm. And does that imply a decel later in the year?

第一個問題，過去一年正向的入住（move-in）費率似乎在第一季把同店營收成長推升到更高水準，同店營收成長達到 1.7%。現在入住費率正在趨於溫和，這是否會在今年剩餘期間對同店營收成長造成壓力？而這是否已反映在你們的同店營收成長指引中，該指引暗示從現在起將趨於放緩？我只是想了解市價（street rates）透過演算法傳導的影響。這是否意味著今年稍晚會出現成長減速？

Yes. Thanks for the question, Michael. No, not necessarily. So while same-store -- or excuse me, new customer rates are an important part to driving same-store revenue growth, obviously, all the other revenue levers are also important. So we did see new customer rate growth moderate from 5% to 6% in January and February to, call it, a little over 1% in March. And then that averages for the quarter at about 2.5% because of the higher volume that you see from a rental standpoint in March.

是的。謝謝你的提問，Michael。不，不一定。因此，雖然同店——或者更正一下，新客戶比率是推動同店營收成長的重要部分，但顯然，其他所有營收槓桿也同樣重要。所以我們確實看到新客戶比率的成長從1月與2月的5%到6%放緩到3月約略高於1%。然後由於3月在租賃面向看到較高的量，該數據在本季平均約為2.5%。

But over that same period of time, particularly in March, we actually picked up occupancy. And as we've always said, we're much more focused on just driving revenue and not focusing on any particular lever. While we're on the topic, I should probably also mention, you probably noticed we converted that metric from reporting new customer rates on a per unit basis to a per square foot basis. While similar, they aren't exactly apples-to-apples, and that reduces the number by about 100 basis points. So on a like-for-like basis, move-in rates would have averaged about 3.5% for the quarter. On a per square foot basis, it was closer to 2.5%.

但在同一段期間，特別是在3月，我們實際上提升了入住率。而且如同我們一貫所說，我們更專注於推動營收，而不是聚焦於任何單一槓桿。既然談到這個主題，我也應該補充，你可能注意到我們把該指標從以「每單位」為基礎報告新客戶比率，改為以「每平方英尺」為基礎。雖然兩者相近，但並非完全可直接對比（不是完全的 apples-to-apples），而這會使數字降低約100個基點。因此，在可比口徑下，搬入率本季平均約為3.5%。以每平方英尺口徑來看，則更接近2.5%。

Got it. And while we're on this topic, Jeff, do you mind providing an update on what you've seen -- we're almost done with April now, but what you've seen so far in April from a street rate occupancy perspective?

了解。既然談到這個主題，Jeff，你介意提供一下最新情況嗎——我們現在4月也快結束了——就4月截至目前，從市價（street rate）入住率的角度，你看到的情況如何？

Yes, continuation of what we saw in March largely where we continue to see improvement in occupancy from both a sequential standpoint and a year-over-year standpoint where that continues to tighten. And then a new customer base from a new customer rate standpoint, modestly positive.

是的，基本上延續了我們在3月看到的情況：無論從環比或同比來看，我們持續看到入住率改善，而且這種改善持續收斂、趨緊。另外，從新客戶比率的角度，新客戶基礎呈現小幅正成長。

And continuing to be ahead of budget.

而且仍然高於預算。

Yes. Yes.

是的。是的。

Samir Khanal, BofA Securities.

Samir Khanal，BofA Securities。

I guess, Joe, maybe to start off, how would you characterize sort of top of funnel demand today? Maybe compare that to last year. And at this time, as we start the leasing season, curious on your thoughts.

我想，Joe，或許先從這裡開始：你會如何描述目前漏斗頂端（top of funnel）的需求狀況？也許可以和去年做個比較。而在我們即將進入租賃旺季之際，也想聽聽你的看法。

I think demand is steady, if I had to characterize it. I don't think we've seen any material improvement or any material degradation in demand. Our systems, our platform, our customer acquisition abilities allow us to capture more than our share of demand that's in the market. So we continue to be the highest occupied of any of our peers at the highest rates. And that's a good spot for us to be in.

如果要我形容，我認為需求是穩定的。我不覺得我們看到需求有任何實質改善或實質惡化。我們的系統、平台以及獲客能力，讓我們能夠捕捉到市場需求中高於我們份額的部分。因此，我們仍然是同業中入住率最高、且在最高價格水準下仍能維持的業者。這對我們來說是個很好的位置。

And maybe as a follow-up on the other side of it, I mean, it certainly feels like commentary is more of optimism. Is that primarily from sort of the lower supply you're seeing? Maybe expand on that, please?

再追問一下，從另一面來看，我的意思是，整體評論似乎更偏向樂觀。這主要是因為你們看到供給較少嗎？能否請你再多談一些？

Yes. That's a good follow-up. So yes, the demand being steady, the -- correlated to that is we are seeing improvement in the supply situation. And many of the markets that were particularly impacted by supply in the Sunbelt, we are starting to see improvement in those markets. So that's very encouraging for us, particularly because we have disproportionate exposure to the Sunbelt, which we believe long term is a positive. That's where the growth is going to be in our country. But in the recent past has been a headwind for us.

是的。這是個很好的追問。所以是的，在需求保持穩定的同時——與此相關的是，我們看到供給面的情況正在改善。而在許多先前因供給而受到特別影響的陽光帶（Sunbelt）市場，我們開始看到這些市場出現改善。這對我們非常鼓舞，特別是因為我們在陽光帶的曝險相對更高，而我們相信長期來看這是正面的。我們國家的成長將會在那裡發生。但在近期過去，這對我們而言一直是逆風。

Brendan Lynch, Barclays.

Brendan Lynch，Barclays。

Maybe you could give us some high-level thoughts on the competitive impact to the market from PSA and NSA being combined?

你是否可以從較高層次談談，PSA與NSA合併後，對市場競爭格局可能帶來的影響？

Well, I mean, we compete with all of those stores now. So we'll continue to compete with them in the future. I think PSA is a very good operator, and I'm confident those stores will do better under one unified platform than the system NSA was pursuing. So we'll continue to compete with them. They've been a good competitor in the past. They'll be a good competitor to us in the future. And it's one reason we never stop trying to get better, never stop trying to sharpen our tools because we know we have good competitors who are doing the same.

嗯，我的意思是，我們現在就已經在和那些門店競爭。所以未來我們也會繼續與他們競爭。我認為PSA是一個非常優秀的營運商，我也有信心，這些門店在一個統一的平台之下，表現會比NSA先前所採用的系統更好。所以我們會繼續與他們競爭。他們過去一直是很好的競爭對手。未來也會是我們很好的競爭對手。這也是我們從不停止變得更好、從不停止磨利工具的原因之一，因為我們知道我們有很強的競爭者也在做同樣的事。

And then maybe just on the volume of transactions and your expectations for an improvement there or growth there. Can you talk about how seller expectations have changed, if at all, or if there's something else that's driving the increase in volume that you anticipate going forward?

另外，關於交易量以及你們對交易量改善或成長的預期。你能談談賣方預期是否有任何改變嗎？或者是否有其他因素在推動你們預期未來交易量會增加？

So it's a really good question. I would tell -- I mean, there is activity in the market. There are things being sold. I would tell you, the last two material transactions we saw priced at -- on our numbers, sub-5 initial cap rates without enough growth to make them interesting in the future. And that's pretty aggressive.

這確實是個很好的問題。我會說——我的意思是，市場上是有活動的。確實有資產在出售。我會告訴你，我們看到最近兩筆較具規模的交易，按我們的數字計算，初始資本化率（initial cap rates）在5%以下，而且沒有足夠的成長性讓它們在未來變得有吸引力。而那是相當激進的。

And I think capital buyers in the market are seeing that we're in the beginning of this recovery cycle and are underwriting that into their numbers. So we have a fairly modest acquisition guidance for this year on a net basis, on an EXR dollar basis. Well, as I said in my remarks, I think we'll close a lot of deals, but many in joint venture structures to make them accretive to our shareholders. But I'll also tell you that we've had a lot of years where we've put out an acquisition number, and we end up finding interesting off-market typically things to do. And we're very active and we have a lot of relationships, and we can be creative and innovative. And I know the team is anxious to try to do that again this year.

而我認為市場上的資本型買家看到我們正處於這一輪復甦循環的初期，並把這點納入他們的承作假設（underwriting）之中。因此，我們今年在淨額口徑、以EXR美元口徑計算的收購指引相當溫和。不過，正如我在發言中提到的，我認為我們會完成很多交易，但其中許多會以合資（joint venture）架構來進行，以使其對股東具增益性（accretive）。但我也要說，我們過去有很多年發布了收購目標數字，最後通常會找到一些有趣的場外（off-market）機會來做。我們非常活躍，也有很多關係網，我們可以很有創意、很有創新。我知道團隊也很期待今年能再次做到這一點。

Ravi Vaidya, Mizuho.

Ravi Vaidya，Mizuho。

I wanted to dig a little bit more at the same-store revenue range. You had a strong first quarter, exceeding the top end of the range. Can you walk us with the upside and downside scenario for the full year? And maybe some color on how you expect the cadence of this will continue throughout '26?

我想更深入探討一下同店營收區間。你們第一季表現強勁，超過了區間上緣。你能否帶我們走一遍全年上行與下行情境？另外，也請提供一些色彩，談談你們預期這個節奏在整個2026年會如何延續？

So from a -- first of all, I appreciate the question, Ravi. And it makes sense. Given where we ended the first quarter relative to our stated same-store revenue range, it makes sense. I think probably the point I want to make most clear is our lack of adjusting guidance isn't a call from our perspective on expected performance for Q2 through Q4. I think we view it more from the standpoint of it's early in the year.

就——首先，Ravi，我很感謝你的問題。而且這很合理。考量到我們第一季結束時相對於我們所公布的同店營收區間的位置，這個問題很合理。我想我最想講清楚的一點是：我們沒有調整指引，並不代表從我們的角度是在對第二季到第四季的預期表現做出某種判斷。我們更多是從「現在還在年初」的角度來看。

We haven't completed our busy leasing season. And combining that with some of the macro factors that are in the background, it seems to make sense to wait one more quarter, see how the leasing season plays out and make those adjustments at that time.

我們尚未完成繁忙的租賃旺季。再加上一些在背景中的總體因素，看起來等再一個季度是合理的，觀察租賃旺季的進展，並在那個時點進行調整。

All of that said from a guidance -- cadence standpoint, so far throughout the year, we've continued to see revenue outperform our internal expectations, and it has accelerated. And we -- but we do know we have harder comps as we move deeper into the year. So if we combine all of those factors, very optimistic about where we stand today versus our stated range, and we'll look to update it in -- after the second quarter.

話雖如此，從指引——節奏的角度來看，截至目前今年以來，我們持續看到營收表現優於我們內部預期，而且還在加速。而我們——但我們也知道，隨著進入今年後段，對比基期會更具挑戰。因此若把所有因素綜合起來，我們對於目前相較於既定區間的位置非常樂觀，並會在——第二季之後再更新。

I'd just like to add that Jeff appropriately points to the risks associated with macro factors, higher gas prices, inflation, consumer confidence. We haven't seen any of that flow through to our business yet. Customer behavior is unchanged. Customers are still accepting ECRI at the same level they have in the past. Bad debt is down actually to 1.5%.

我想補充的是，Jeff 很恰當地指出了與總體因素相關的風險：油價上漲、通膨、消費者信心。我們目前尚未看到這些因素傳導到我們的業務上。客戶行為沒有改變。客戶仍以與過去相同的水準接受 ECRI。壞帳實際上下降到 1.5%。

Vacates remain muted compared to historical numbers. And we see this across all different demographic markets. So that's very positive for us. So our caution isn't because of anything that we've actually seen. It's more of an unknown, and we just feel it's prudent to wait for the leasing season in another quarter before we revisit guidance.

退租（vacates）相較於歷史水準仍然偏低。而且我們在各種不同的人口結構市場都看到這種情況。所以這對我們非常正面。因此我們的謹慎並不是因為我們實際看到了什麼。更多是因為未知，我們覺得在重新檢視指引之前，審慎起見先再等一個季度、看完租賃旺季的表現。

Eric Wolfe, Citi.

Citi 的 Eric Wolfe。

Can you just talk about the reason for the change in the definition of move-in rate growth? And what explains the delta between the 2.4% you reported? And I think you said mid-3s on the other definition?

你能談談為什麼要更改入住（move-in）租金成長率的定義嗎？以及你們報告的 2.4% 與——我想你說另一種定義是 3% 中段——之間的差異是什麼原因？

Yes, you're exactly right. Thanks, Eric. The reason for the change was really just market feedback. We had heard that from both buy-side and sell-side analysts, I think, for consistency with disclosures from other peers and wanted to accommodate that request. And in terms of why the delta between the two approaches, what it comes down to is volumes, rental activity between larger and smaller units and pricing power within those units. So on the margin, saw stronger pricing power in some of the larger units within the quarter, creating the delta.

是的，你說得完全正確。謝謝你，Eric。更改的原因主要是市場回饋。我們從買方與賣方分析師那裡都聽到，希望能與其他同業的揭露保持一致，因此我們想配合這個需求。至於兩種方法之間為何會有差異，歸根結底是量的因素：大、小坪數單位之間的出租活動，以及各單位內的定價能力。因此在邊際上，本季在部分較大單位看到更強的定價能力，造成了這個差異。

Got it. And you mentioned that I think across both definitions, the rent growth came down a bit in March and April. Can you talk about whether that was just from sort of tougher comps or something changed in the environment? I know you're always trying to optimize for the best revenue growth. So I guess I'm asking why the system determined that sort of lower asking rent growth was the best revenue maximizing decision at that time.

了解。你提到我想在兩種定義下，3 月和 4 月的租金成長都稍微降了一些。你能談談這是否只是因為對比基期更具挑戰，或是環境有什麼改變嗎？我知道你們一直在嘗試最佳化以取得最好的營收成長。所以我想問的是，為什麼系統判定當時較低的要價租金成長，是能使營收最大化的最佳決策？

Yes, I think it's possible that it's a few of the factors you mentioned combined. So certainly are lapping harder comps, so those continue to become more difficult throughout the year. And I think the model is always evaluating price elasticity and seeing where is the optimal balance for total revenue. So in March, we did see it lean a little more into occupancy and take more occupancy, closing that gap on a year-over-year basis. And as we've always said, we're happy with either as long as we feel like we're getting the right revenue outcome. And based on the results, we're really pleased with how it's gone through the first quarter.

是的，我認為可能是你提到的幾個因素共同作用。確實我們正在跨越更具挑戰的對比基期，因此今年越往後會越難。而模型也一直在評估價格彈性，尋找總營收的最佳平衡點。所以在 3 月，我們確實看到它稍微更偏向提高入住率、吸收更多入住，讓年對年差距縮小。而且我們一向說過，只要我們覺得能得到正確的營收結果，兩者我們都可以接受。從結果來看，我們對第一季的表現非常滿意。

Nicholas Yulico, Scotiabank.

Scotiabank 的 Nicholas Yulico。

This is Viktor Fediv on with Nick. I have a question on your bridge loan book. So you originated only $5.5 million this quarter. Last year, it was more than $50 million in Q1. So what was the driver behind that slowdown on a year-over-year basis? Was it just the slower activity or interest rates not attractive for you?

我是 Viktor Fediv，和 Nick 一起。我有一個關於你們過橋貸款（bridge loan）組合的問題。所以你們本季只承作了 550 萬美元。去年第一季超過 5,000 萬美元。那麼年對年放緩的驅動因素是什麼？是單純交易活動變慢，還是利率對你們而言不具吸引力？

So I don't think this program, just like our acquisition program is going to produce steady volume quarter after quarter. There will be some volumes that are higher and there are some volumes that are lower -- some quarters, excuse me, that have higher volume and some quarters that have lower volume. So we did have a quiet quarter in terms of originations. We did have a good quarter though with respect to approvals for future loans.

我不認為這個計畫——就像我們的收購計畫一樣——會在每一季都產生穩定的量。有些量會比較高，也有些量會比較低——抱歉，是有些季度量比較高，有些季度量比較低。所以就承作而言，我們這一季確實比較安靜。不過在未來貸款的核准方面，我們這一季表現不錯。

Overall, I think the business is a little slower due to transaction activity and lesser development, right? A portion of our loans are for newly delivered properties. And as the number of those goes down, the number of lending opportunities goes down with it. There's also more competitive lenders, right? There's others who kind of followed us into this business. But overall, we're comfortable and happy with our volume and our ability to make loans and continue with this program.

整體而言，我認為由於交易活動較少、開發量較低，業務確實慢了一些，對吧？我們有一部分貸款是針對新交付的物件。而當這類物件數量下降時，放貸機會也會隨之下降。另外也有更多具競爭力的放款人，對吧？有其他人某種程度上跟著我們進入了這個業務。但整體來說，我們對目前的量以及我們放款、並持續推動這個計畫的能力感到安心且滿意。

Got it. And then as a follow-up. So given that your loan book serves as a potential acquisition pipeline, so out of your $200 million kind of guidance for this year, how much do you expect to get through this [funnel]? And how does the pricing differ from what's kind of available on the market otherwise?

了解。接著追問一下。既然你們的貸款組合可作為潛在的收購管道，那在你們今年約 2 億美元的指引中，你們預期有多少會透過這個[漏斗]來實現？而其定價與市場上其他可取得的機會相比，有何不同？

So we don't assume we'll buy anything out of the loan program. That would be additional volume that we could get. And our pricing discipline is the same regardless of how the acquisition comes to us from the management business, from a joint venture, from the bridge loan program are on the market, we still want to make accretive transactions given our cost of capital or structure the acquisition such that we can make it accretive.

我們不會假設一定會從貸款計畫中買進任何資產。那會是我們可能取得的額外量。而不論收購機會是透過管理業務、合資、過橋貸款計畫或是市場上來的，我們的定價紀律都一樣：在我們的資金成本之下，我們仍希望做出具增益（accretive）的交易，或是把收購結構設計成能夠具增益。

And while we don't specifically model or guide towards a specific volume of acquisitions through the bridge loan program, our experience has been that those opportunities end up coming to fruition. Historically, we've purchased about 25% of the underlying collateral of loans that we've originated. And I don't see any reason that we wouldn't continue to see quite a few acquisition opportunities from that program. So we don't model it, but to Joe's point, I think we'll see our fair share.

此外，雖然我們不會特別建模或提供透過過橋貸款計畫進行收購的特定量的指引，但我們的經驗是，這些機會最終往往會落地。歷史上，我們大約買下了我們所承作貸款之底層擔保品的 25%。我看不出有什麼理由讓我們未來不會繼續從該計畫中看到相當多的收購機會。所以我們不會把它納入模型，但如同 Joe 所說，我認為我們會看到相當比例的機會。

Juan Sanabria, BMO Capital Markets.

BMO Capital Markets 的 Juan Sanabria。

Just hoping, Joe or Jeff, if you could talk a little bit about the length of stay and how that's trending, typically talk about over 12 and 24 months? And if you've seen any change in vacates or churn? And if ECRIs have played any part in that?

想請教 Joe 或 Jeff，能否談談住戶停留時間（length of stay）的長度以及其趨勢？你們通常會談 12 個月以上與 24 個月以上的情況。以及你們是否看到退租（vacates）或流失/周轉（churn）有任何變化？ECRI 是否在其中扮演了任何角色？

So we'll answer it in reverse order. So as you know, we do monitor real carefully, our ECRI-induced churn, and we haven't seen any change in that level of churn. So that program still seems to be working as designed, and customer behavior has not changed with respond to that.

那我們倒過來回答。如你所知，我們非常仔細地監控由 ECRI 引發的流失（churn），而我們沒有看到該流失水準有任何變化。所以這個計畫看起來仍按設計運作，客戶對此的行為也沒有改變。

With respect to length of stay, current tenants over 12 months is about 64% of our tenants. And that's 167-basis-point improvement from prior year, year ago March. Current tenants over 24 months is about 46%, and that's a 190-basis-point improvement from a year ago. So tenants are staying longer. Our systems continue to do a better and better job targeting and attracting tenants who are more likely to stay longer. And it's a great benefit to the business, particularly where we have steady -- kind of steady and price-sensitive demand.

就租期長度而言，租住超過12個月的現有租戶約占我們租戶的64%。相較前一年、也就是去年3月，提升了167個基點。租住超過24個月的現有租戶約占46%，較一年前提升了190個基點。因此租戶停留時間正在拉長。我們的系統持續在鎖定並吸引更可能長期租住的租戶方面做得越來越好。這對業務是很大的助益，特別是在我們面對穩定——算是穩定且對價格敏感的需求之處。

And Juan, I would add, you mentioned churn. Churn was really flat for the quarter. So rental and vacate volume on a year-over-year basis Q1 '25 compared to Q1 '26 is basically flat. And that's comping almost all-time lows. So churn is still relatively muted compared to average historical number.

另外，Juan，我補充一下，你提到的流失率。本季的流失率其實幾乎持平。所以以年對年來看，2025年第一季相較2026年第一季的出租與退租量基本上持平。而且這是在對比幾乎是歷史最低水準。因此相較於歷史平均值，流失率仍相對溫和。

Thanks for that context. And just on the third-party management, maybe just following up on the bridge loan question. Have you seen any impacts from new entrants, either REITs or some of the larger privates looking at managing assets themselves either on their own behalf or for third parties in terms of squeezing fees or margins or anything of that for that third-party management business?

謝謝這些背景說明。另外關於第三方管理，或許接續一下你剛才提到的過橋貸款問題。你們是否看到新進入者帶來任何影響——不論是REITs或一些較大型的私人業者——他們開始自行管理資產（不管是為自己或為第三方），在壓縮費用、利潤率或任何與第三方管理業務相關的方面？

We really haven't. I mean, one, we're not changing our pricing at all. We are the highest priced option in the market because we produce the best results and have the best platform and provide the best service. So our growth in this, another 60 net in this quarter is much faster than any of our competitors. And to us, it's the market speaking. The market is choosing the best platform even if they have to pay more for us. So we have not seen any impact on our business from new entrants.

我們其實沒有看到。首先，我們完全沒有調整定價。我們是市場上收費最高的選項，因為我們能產出最好的成果、擁有最好的平台並提供最好的服務。因此我們在這塊的成長——本季淨增加60個——遠快於任何競爭對手。對我們而言，這就是市場在發聲。市場選擇最好的平台，即使必須為我們支付更高費用。所以我們沒有看到新進入者對我們業務造成任何影響。

Michael Griffin, Evercore ISI.

Michael Griffin，Evercore ISI。

Maybe circling back on your points earlier, Joe, around revenue optimization, and I realize you're not going to give us the secret sauce. But as you think about the interplay between rate and occupancy, I mean, what are the signals that you're looking at, that the team is looking at to say, hey, now is a good time to push rate over occupancy? You've highlighted a number of times about how highly occupied the portfolio is. If you have a market to say hits 95% occupancy as an example, are you really going to try to push there? Or how should we think about the puts and takes between the interplay of those two?

或許回到你先前提到的幾點，Joe，關於營收最佳化。我也知道你不會把祕密配方告訴我們。但當你思考租金與入住率之間的互動時，我是說，你們在看哪些訊號——團隊在看哪些訊號——來判斷「嘿，現在是把租金優先於入住率的好時機」？你多次強調投資組合的入住率非常高。如果某個市場例如達到95%的入住率，你們真的會想在那個水位上推升租金嗎？或者我們應該如何理解這兩者互動之間的取捨？

So the way you asked the question makes it seem like Jeff and I and a bunch of the other folks on the team sit around the table and say, let's get 50 basis points more occupancy. It really doesn't work that way. We have several proprietary algorithms that were built with our extensive data set that price every unit type in every building every night.

你這樣問，聽起來好像Jeff、我以及團隊裡其他一些人會坐在桌邊說：「我們把入住率再提高50個基點吧。」其實不是這樣運作的。我們有幾套以我們龐大資料集建立的專有演算法，每晚都會為每棟建物的每一種單位類型進行定價。

So we'll look at the 5x5s on Main Street in Philadelphia and look at historical vacates and many dozens of factors and decide for that unit price, that unit type, it's going to drop price because that's how it can maximize -- get the right number of rentals to maximize occupancy. And that happens for 2.8 million units every night. And that rolls up into something where we say the system is leaning a little bit more towards occupancy. But that doesn't mean that's the case with every unit type, every building, every market. Now while that's going on, we do have data scientists looking at it and kind of checking it and making sure that there's nothing new in the environment that the algorithm doesn't know that we need to take a second look at or test. But that's the level of human involvement, not making individual decisions about rate or occupancy.

所以我們會看費城主街上的5x5單位，檢視歷史退租情況與數十項因素，並決定該單位價格、該單位類型是否要降價，因為那樣才能最大化——取得適當的出租量以最大化入住率。而這件事每晚會在280萬個單位上發生。最後彙總起來，我們可能會說系統整體上稍微更偏向入住率。但這不代表每一種單位類型、每一棟建物、每一個市場都是如此。在這個過程中，我們確實有資料科學家在觀察並做檢核，確保環境中沒有出現演算法尚未掌握的新變化，需要我們再看第二眼或進行測試。但人為介入的程度就到這裡，而不是針對租金或入住率做個別決策。

And Griff, maybe I would just tack on to that. And with our scale and as the tools continue to get better, you can see that data in much shorter time periods to make those decisions, and the system can recalibrate faster than it ever has before as the data and tools improve, which is a significant advantage for the large operators.

Griff，我也許再補充一下。以我們的規模，加上工具持續變得更好，你可以在更短的時間區間內看到那些數據來做決策；而且隨著數據與工具改善，系統能比以往更快重新校準，這對大型營運商而言是顯著優勢。

I certainly appreciate the helpful context there. Maybe next, just on the same-store expense growth and the cadence. It seemed like the quarter was pretty down the fairway relative to the guide. But Jeff, as I'm thinking about it, I know there were probably some more elevated operating expenses in the middle part of last year, call it 2Q, 3Q. So can you maybe walk us through or if you can give us some color on expectations of cadence? Is it easier comps in the second and third quarter? Just how should we think about sort of same-store expenses on a quarterly basis for the balance of the year?

我非常感謝這些有幫助的背景。接下來也許談同店費用成長與節奏。看起來本季相對於指引是相當符合預期。但Jeff，從我的角度來看，我知道去年年中可能有一些較高的營運費用，大概是第二季、第三季。所以你能否帶我們走一遍，或提供一些對節奏的看法與預期？第二季和第三季的比較基期是否更容易？總之，我們應該如何看待今年剩餘期間同店費用在季度層面的走勢？

Yes. I think it's more of a first half, second half comp differential. So first half, you had easier comps with property taxes in particular being the real standout. And we'll lap that in the back half of the year and have more difficult comps, but still anticipate similar performance. As you mentioned, relative to the guide, we're well within it. Outside a couple of those weather-related exceptions that I mentioned, all of our expenses came in really right in line with what we expected.

是的。我認為更像是上半年與下半年之間的比較基期差異。所以上半年有較容易的比較基期，尤其是不動產稅這一項特別明顯。到了下半年我們會把那段基期「跨過」之後，會面臨較困難的比較基期，但我們仍預期表現相近。如你所提，相對於指引，我們完全在區間之內。除了我提到的幾個與天氣相關的例外，我們所有費用的實際結果都非常符合我們的預期。

Maybe one specific call out, Griff, that would be helpful just because it's a little larger in magnitude and timing based is our insurance expense, which in Q1 was over 10%. We renew our insurance policies in the end of May. And all of the feedback we're getting so far, we're actively negotiating that renewal right now is that it's a favorable environment for insureds. And we expect that to come in relatively flat, if not better. So we were optimistic that we also have some opportunity with insurance, which was already factored into our guidance. We figured that would be the case.

Griff，或許特別點出一項會有幫助，因為它在幅度上較大、且與時間點相關：我們的保險費用，第一季超過10%。我們在5月底更新保單。目前我們收到的所有回饋——我們正在積極協商這次續保——都顯示對被保險人而言是較有利的環境。我們預期費用會相對持平，甚至更好。所以我們對保險也抱持樂觀，認為仍有一些改善空間，而這已經納入我們的指引之中。我們原本就預期會是這樣。

Ronald Kamdem, Morgan Stanley.

Ronald Kamdem，Morgan Stanley。

Great. Just two quick ones. Staying with expenses. I know philosophically, you guys have had a little bit of a different view in terms of the -- sort of the service associates that are in the stores and the ability to sort of optimize the revenue with that person there. But I guess my question is just as you're thinking about the next couple of years, is there more opportunity to take expenses out of the structure? Or is it pretty much as optimized as you can get?

很好。兩個很快的問題。延續費用的話題。我知道在理念上，你們對於——門市裡的服務人員（service associates）以及有這個人在場以最佳化營收的能力——在看法上一直稍微不同。但我的問題是，當你們思考未來幾年時，是否還有更多機會從成本結構中再把費用降下來？還是說基本上已經最佳化到你們能做到的程度了？

I think there's always opportunities to take expenses out of the structure. And I think there's several factors that will lead us to that. One is growth in densification. As we get more stores in a market, it becomes more efficient, and we can run those stores with fewer people and supervisory people, right? If a district manager has to fly to three different markets, he can cover fewer stores than if all of these markets are in one store and he can drive to them, he or she can drive to them. So that growth is one.

我認為在組織架構中，總是有機會把費用降下來。而我認為有幾個因素會帶領我們做到這點。其一是門店密度提升所帶來的成長。當我們在同一個市場有更多門店時，營運會更有效率，我們就能用更少的門店人員與督導人員來運作這些門店，對吧？如果一位區域經理必須飛到三個不同市場，他能管理的門店數就會比所有市場都在同一個區域、他（或她）可以開車往返時少。所以成長是其中一項。

Second is AI. And certainly, we're looking at lots and lots of opportunities for reporting and analysis and audit and all sorts of different things that we can get more efficient through using AI tools. And then third is customer preference. Right now, we like to have managers in the stores more than our competitors because the customers want that. 39% of our customers end up signing a lease by choice, sitting across the table from a store manager.

第二是 AI。當然，我們正在評估非常多的機會，包含報表、分析、稽核，以及各式各樣不同的事情，我們都可以透過使用 AI 工具來提升效率。第三是客戶偏好。目前，我們比競爭對手更傾向在門店配置經理，因為客戶想要這樣。39% 的客戶最後是出於自己的選擇，在門店與店經理面對面坐下來簽約。

28% to 30% of those have never interacted with us on the web or on the phone. And they all have phones, they all have computers. They could call the call center. They can do a transaction totally online. They're choosing to come to the store for a reason. They want to see the 5x5. They want to see how clean it is. They don't understand how to get into the gate, et cetera.

其中有 28% 到 30% 的客戶從未在網路或電話上與我們互動過。而他們都有手機，也都有電腦。他們可以打給客服中心。他們也可以完全在線上完成交易。他們選擇到門店來是有原因的。他們想看看 5x5 的儲物空間。他們想看看有多乾淨。他們不清楚怎麼進出大門等等。

So as long as the customers want that, we'll provide it. But we also know that when you look at the demographics, the younger customers want that much less than the older customers. So as our customer base ages, we imagine that demand by customers will get fewer and fewer. And at that point, we will need fewer and fewer people on site. So yes, sorry for the long answer.

所以只要客戶想要這樣，我們就會提供。但我們也知道，從人口結構來看，年輕客戶對此的需求遠低於年長客戶。因此，隨著我們的客群結構變得更年輕，我們預期客戶端的需求會越來越少。到那個時候，我們現場需要的人力也會越來越少。所以是的，抱歉回答得有點長。

But yes, there's always opportunities to continue to gain expense efficiencies. But at a high-margin business, we will always keep an eye on the revenue line item and make sure that nothing we're doing on the expense line item is going to damage the revenue line item because that is of much more importance.

但總之，是的，持續提升費用效率的機會一直都在。不過在一個高毛利的業務中，我們永遠會盯緊營收這一項，並確保我們在費用端做的任何事都不會傷害營收端，因為那重要得多。

Great. That's really helpful. And then my second question, if I may, is just on the revenue line item when you sort of talked about the algorithm that's pricing 2.8 million units sort of every night. If you think about sort of the -- with AI coming in, the amount of data on the customer is only going to go up exponentially. I guess I'd love to hear some thoughts on how you integrate that new wave of data on the customer? And how does that sort of plug into this algorithm to maybe even make it more efficient?

很好。這真的很有幫助。那我第二個問題，如果可以的話，是關於營收端：你提到那個演算法每晚會對約 280 萬個單位進行定價。如果從 AI 導入的角度來看，客戶相關的資料量只會呈指數型增加。我很想聽聽你們如何把這一波新的客戶資料整合進來？以及這些資料如何接入這個演算法，讓它可能變得更有效率？

So our algorithms have had what we used to call machine learning in them for a long time. So I guess that's a form of artificial intelligence. And I wish I knew the answer to your question. I think there's lots and lots of opportunities. And the biggest challenge with implementing AI is triaging the opportunities, understanding them, and then implementing them in an effective and safe manner.

我們的演算法很早就納入了我們過去稱為機器學習的東西。所以我想那也是人工智慧的一種形式。而我希望我知道你問題的答案。我認為機會非常非常多。而導入 AI 最大的挑戰在於：對機會進行分流與排序、理解它們，然後以有效且安全的方式落地實施。

And luckily, we have a lot of smart people here who are focused on that. I don't have to be the expert on that because it's -- there's not one clear road map. And I think we and other large companies have the ability, technology, resources to focus on that and effectively implement AI in our pricing models and in lots of other areas of our business. And I think it's just going to increase the kind of gap between the large and small companies and how they can operate their businesses.

幸運的是，我們這裡有很多聰明的人專注在這件事上。我不必成為這方面的專家，因為——並沒有一條清晰的路線圖。我認為我們以及其他大型公司具備能力、技術與資源，能專注於此，並在我們的定價模型以及業務的許多其他領域有效導入 AI。我也認為這只會進一步拉大大型公司與小型公司在營運能力上的差距。

Todd Thomas, KeyBanc Capital Markets.

Todd Thomas，KeyBanc Capital Markets。

In terms of the first quarter outperformance relative to your budget, which you mentioned has carried into April, the same-store revenue growth and the improvement you saw was relatively broad-based across the portfolio. Where did you see the wins or the outperformance? Is there anything specific that you can point to that resulted in the better results in the quarter?

就第一季相對於你們預算的超預期表現而言，你提到這個趨勢延續到四月，同店營收成長以及你們看到的改善在整個投資組合中相對廣泛。你們在哪些地方看到勝出或超預期？有沒有任何具體因素可以指出，導致本季結果更好？

Yes. So some of your stronger markets, Todd, you can see in the results include Chicago, Washington, D.C., a lot of the Midwest and coastal markets. And as we've talked about for a long time, the strongest correlation seems to be new supply. Places where there was less pressure from supply earlier are the areas where we got pricing power earliest, which is now flowing through to revenue.

有。Todd，你可以從結果中看到一些較強的市場，包括芝加哥、華盛頓特區，以及許多中西部與沿海市場。而且如同我們長期以來所談的，最強的相關性似乎在於新增供給。先前供給壓力較小的地區，是我們最早取得定價權的地方，而這些定價權現在正反映到營收上。

And then you've seen some of that pricing benefits starting to roll through to other stores. So I think Joe mentioned earlier in the call that in some of our Sunbelt markets where we had experienced a lot of headwinds from a new customer rate standpoint in '24 or '25, where we're starting to get a little more traction as well. So no specific tailwind that I'd say is driving outside of improvement in fundamentals driven by supply.

接著你也看到部分定價帶來的效益開始逐步傳導到其他門店。所以我想 Joe 在電話會議稍早提到，在我們一些陽光帶市場，從 2024 或 2025 年的新客戶價格（rate）角度曾面臨不少逆風，而我們也開始看到一些進展。因此我不會說有什麼特定的順風因素在推動；主要還是供給所帶動的基本面改善。

Okay. And then, yes, I guess following up a little bit. My second question was about the Sunbelt. I'm just curious, do you think the Sunbelt is sort of out of the woods here? There were some of the largest sequential moves in the quarter were in some of the Texas markets, Atlanta, Phoenix.

了解。那接著追問一下。我的第二個問題是關於陽光帶。我只是好奇，你認為陽光帶現在算是走出困境了嗎？本季一些最大的環比變動出現在德州的部分市場、亞特蘭大、鳳凰城。

I mean, do you see those trends continuing in the near term? And then I know that you've integrated the Life Storage portfolio now for a couple of years, but are you seeing any greater momentum in that portfolio now that the conditions are starting to recover?

你是否看到這些趨勢在短期內會持續？另外我知道你們整合 Life Storage 的投資組合也有幾年了，但在市場狀況開始復甦之際，你們是否在該投資組合看到更強的動能？

So the Sunbelt doesn't operate as one market. It's hard for us to say the Sunbelt is doing this, the Sunbelt is doing that. And we are big believers in diversification, and the markets act differently, and we want to have exposure to lots and lots of good growth markets. There are some Sunbelt markets that performance has significantly improved. Atlanta, Austin, Dallas, Miami, Phoenix are some examples of those. Southwest, Florida, Tampa, still facing some headwinds and some difficulties. Houston is another one I'd put. So we are seeing recovery in many markets, but not in all markets. The LSI stores, to the extent that they were disproportionately in the Sunbelt are having that experience. But overall, their performance is akin to Extra Space stores now.

陽光帶並不是以單一市場的方式運作。我們很難說陽光帶在做這個、陽光帶在做那個。而我們非常相信分散化；各市場表現不同，我們也希望在許多優質的成長市場都有曝險。有些陽光帶市場的表現已顯著改善。亞特蘭大、奧斯汀、達拉斯、邁阿密、鳳凰城就是一些例子。西南部、佛州、坦帕仍面臨一些逆風與困難。休士頓也是我會列入的另一個。所以我們在許多市場看到復甦，但不是所有市場。LSI 的門店，若其分布在陽光帶的比重較高，就會有這樣的體感。但整體而言，他們現在的表現已與 Extra Space 的門店相近。

And Todd, you asked, are they -- are those markets out of the woods, so to speak. I think we continue to still see a relatively price-sensitive new customers. So it's not like we are able to push double-digit new customer rate growth across the board.

Todd，你問這些市場是否算是走出困境。我認為我們仍持續看到新客戶相對價格敏感。所以並不是說我們能在各市場全面推動新客戶價格（rate）出現兩位數成長。

And as Joe mentioned earlier, you see that down to the property type, unit type where different products moving better and then that rolls up into markets and eventually the whole portfolio. So it's pretty granular. I think we'll need to keep working through supply in some of those markets. But directionally, it's certainly improving.

正如 Joe 先前提到的，你可以一路細分到物業類型、單位類型，看到哪些不同產品的表現更好，然後再彙總到各個市場，最終到整個投資組合。所以它相當細緻。我認為我們仍需要在其中一些市場持續消化供給。但就方向而言，確實正在改善。

Salil Mehta, Green Street Advisors.

Salil Mehta，Green Street Advisors。

I'd just like to touch quickly back on move-in rates here. But you've been able to achieve a positive move-in rate growth for consecutive quarters now, which is great. But I guess the question I have here is, how sustainable or how far can we expect this positive pricing momentum to continue without the lack of the housing market recovery? Is the positive momentum that we're seeing for the last two quarters is more of a function of easier comps?

我想快速回到入住（move-in）費率這個話題。你們已經連續幾個季度實現入住費率的正成長，這很棒。但我想問的是：在房市尚未復甦的情況下，這樣的正向定價動能能有多可持續、或我們可以期待它還能延續多久？我們過去兩個季度看到的正向動能，是否更多是因為比較基期（comps）變得更容易？

But I think easier comps are a factor. But I also think with steady demand and reduced supply is another factor, right? So it's kind of two sides of the coin, right, if demand stays the same, but if supply reduces, that's positive for us.

我認為比較基期較容易確實是一個因素。但我也認為，需求穩定與供給減少也是另一個因素，對吧？所以這有點像硬幣的兩面：如果需求維持不變，但供給減少，這對我們就是正面的。

And Salil, I think I'd add that with our original guide, we did not factor in an improvement in the broader housing market to achieve our range. So our assumption coming into it was a relatively flat housing market to what we've seen year-over-year. And if we were to see some acceleration from the housing market, that certainly would be a tailwind for us and could accelerate the recovery. I think absent that, we'll still see a recovery. It just -- it's probably a little flatter slope.

Salil，我想補充的是：在我們最初的指引中，為了達到我們的區間，我們並沒有把整體房市改善納入假設。因此，我們在做假設時，是以房市相較於去年大致持平為前提。如果房市出現某種加速，那對我們當然會是順風，並可能加快復甦。即便沒有那樣的情況，我們仍會看到復甦。只是——斜率可能會更平緩一些。

Great. And just another follow-up here on the housing market. Nationwide, the country is definitely still struggling, but are you guys perhaps looking at any market specifically that are, for us, recovering better than average or could be better positioned when home sales eventually or hopefully rebound?

了解。再追問一個關於房市的問題。全國層面來看，確實仍在掙扎，但你們是否特別關注某些市場，它們的復甦表現優於平均，或在未來房屋銷售最終（希望）反彈時，可能更具優勢？

Yes, it's a difficult analysis. And when you say looking, I assume you mean from an acquisition standpoint. We found it's really hard to target acquisitions to say we would love to be in Seattle, right? So we think we're underexposed in Seattle. But we find when we go and identify stores in Seattle and cold call the owners, they put prices on the table that are pretty aggressive. So we need to be a little more reactive to what's on the market as opposed to targeting markets. We've tried that in the past and have not had a lot of success.

是的，這是一個很難分析的問題。你說的「關注」，我猜你是指從收購的角度。我們發現，要把收購鎖定在某個市場其實很難，比如說我們很想進入西雅圖，對吧？我們認為我們在西雅圖的曝險不足。但當我們去找出西雅圖的店點並主動致電業主時，他們開出的價格通常相當進取。因此，相較於鎖定特定市場，我們需要更偏向對市場上出現的標的做出反應。我們過去嘗試過鎖定市場，但並沒有取得太多成功。

Caitlin Burrows, Goldman Sachs.

Caitlin Burrows，高盛。

We've talked a lot about the impact that supply can have, and it seems like it's coming down. So that's good. I guess, can you give any insight on what you're seeing across the industry on new starts and the current expectation of how kind of supply will compare in '26 for '25, but then maybe visibility on those starts and what it could mean for '27?

我們談了很多供給可能帶來的影響，而看起來供給正在下降，這是好事。所以這很好。我想問的是：你能否分享一下你們在產業中看到的新開工（new starts）情況，以及目前對於 2026 年相較 2025 年供給大概會如何的預期？

Yes, sure. I think we have really good visibility, maybe better than anyone else, primarily through our third-party management business because we get an extraordinary number of inquiries from people saying, we want you to manage this development, would you take a look at it for us? And many, many of those end up not happening, but we do get a sense for the volume of that and whether it's increasing or decreasing, it is decreasing, and what the deals look like. We also look at Yardi data, right? Yardi, I think, produces good data. They -- their data says that national starts are going to reduce from 2.8% to 2.3% of total stock between '25 and '26.

好的，當然。我認為我們的能見度非常高，可能比任何人都更好，主要是透過我們的第三方物業管理業務，因為我們會收到非常多的詢問：有人會說，我們希望你們管理這個開發案，你們能幫我們看看嗎？其中很多、很多最後都不會真的發生，但我們確實能感受到這類案量的規模，以及它是在增加還是減少——目前是在減少——以及這些交易長什麼樣子。我們也會看 Yardi 的數據，對吧？我認為 Yardi 產出的數據不錯。他們的數據顯示，全國新開工占總存量的比例，將在 2025 到 2026 年間從 2.8% 降到 2.3%。

Another data point we use is number of our same-store square footage that is having a new competitor delivered in its trade area. And that, in '21, '22, '23, it was in the high 20%, 84% over those three years. It went down to 13% in '24, 8% in '25, and we think it will be 6% in '26. So clearly, new supply is not going to zero, but it's clearly moving in the right direction, and we're feeling the effects of that.

我們使用的另一個數據點，是我們同店（same-store）面積中，有多少比例的商圈會有新的競爭對手交付。而在 2021、2022、2023 年，這個比例都在 20% 後段，這三年合計達到 84%。它在 2024 年降到 13%，2025 年降到 8%，我們認為 2026 年會是 6%。所以很明顯，新供給不會降到零，但也很明顯正在往正確方向走，我們也正在感受到其影響。

And pointing out the obvious, but with the lease-up time since we can't pre-lease these properties, this is generally on a rolling three- or four-year basis. And so every year that you tack on, another one of these single-digit delivery years using the numbers that Joe provided versus 2023, that was well into 20s, there's a material benefit from that.

再說一個顯而易見的點：由於我們無法對這些物業進行預租（pre-lease），因此從交付到租滿（lease-up）的時間通常是以滾動的三到四年為週期。因此，每多往後推一年，就等於再多納入一年這種「交付比例為個位數」的年份——用 Joe 提供的數字來看，相較於 2023 年那種 20% 多的水準——這會帶來實質的好處。

Got it. And then I think on the previous question, you were just talking about the acquisition environment and that if you seek somebody out, maybe then the pricing is too high. So I guess could you talk a little bit about what you're seeing come to market? Is there anything on the portfolio side? And I know you said that you mentioned that you might do more on JVs versus 100% ownership. But yes, what kind of opportunities you're seeing?

了解。另外我想回到前一個問題，你剛才談到收購環境：如果你主動去找某個人，價格可能就會太高。那你能否談談你們目前看到有哪些標的正在上市？在投資組合（portfolio）層面有什麼機會嗎？我也知道你提到你們可能會做更多合資（JV），而不是 100% 持有。那你們看到的是什麼樣的機會？

There are opportunities on the market. I think I referenced earlier in the call, the last two sizable opportunity [graded] numbers that were initial yields of sub-5 and didn't have sufficient growth in them to get to numbers we would consider accretive in a reasonable period of time. Most deals we're seeing in the 5s somewhere on initial yield. And I know initial yield is not really the most important factor, but it's a good comparative we can all talk to.

市場上確實有一些機會。我想我在電話會議前面提到過，最近兩個較大的機會——[graded]——其初始收益率低於 5%，而且內含成長不足，無法在合理期間內達到我們認為具增益（accretive）的水準。我們目前看到的大多數交易，初始收益率大概落在 5% 多的區間。我知道初始收益率並不是最重要的因素，但它是一個大家都能用來比較、討論的良好指標。

So again, I'm sorry to repeat myself. We're really allergic to growing for growth's sake. When we invest our shareholders' dollars, we want that to be an accretive strategic transaction. And if we can't do that, we are willing to be patient.

所以再次抱歉我重複了。我們對「為了成長而成長」非常反感。當我們投資股東的資金時，我們希望那是一筆具增益的策略性交易。如果做不到，我們願意保持耐心。

Eric Luebchow, Wells Fargo.

Eric Luebchow，富國銀行。

Just one on capital allocation. So Joe, you're just talking about how acquisition cap rates are still pretty aggressive from what you've seen. So does it change at all, your strategy to consider maybe more potential asset sales or potentially buying back even more stock as opposed to going after deals?

我有一個關於資本配置（capital allocation）的问题。Joe，你剛才提到從你看到的情況來看，收購的資本化率（cap rates）仍然相當進取。那這是否會改變你們的策略：例如考慮更多潛在的資產出售，或是回購更多股票，而不是去追逐交易？

Yes. So asset sales for us is more an effort to improve the portfolio to sell assets that either want to reduce our market exposure or we don't think have growth rate -- future growth rates that are attractive to the portfolio or maybe require a bunch of capital that we don't think we'll get a return on. And so we're typically selling those at cap rates appropriate for the properties that are at the bottom of our portfolio. And it typically is short-term dilutive, depending on what we use the money for, I guess, if we put in bridge loans or value adds, it's not. So it -- we wouldn't accelerate that as a source of capital.

會的。對我們而言，資產出售更多是為了改善投資組合：出售那些我們想降低市場曝險的資產，或我們認為其成長率——未來成長率——對投資組合不具吸引力的資產，或可能需要投入大量資本但我們認為無法取得相應回報的資產。因此，我們通常會以符合這些資產（位於我們投資組合底部）的資本化率來出售。而這通常在短期內會造成稀釋（dilutive），這取決於我們把資金用在什麼地方；我想如果我們投入過橋貸款（bridge loans）或增值型投資（value adds），就不會。所以——我們不會把它加速作為資金來源。

Stock repurchase as a use of capital is not something we're allergic to at all. We bought about $140 million worth of our shares in the fourth quarter at a little bit below $130. We continued that into the very early part of January and bought this quarter, $1 million or $1.5 million, something like that, of stock. The stock price then got volatile. It went up.

以股票回購作為資本運用方式，我們一點也不排斥。我們在第四季以略低於130美元的價格回購了約1.4億美元的自家股票。我們在1月初非常早的時候也延續了這項動作，本季回購了約100萬或150萬美元左右的股票。之後股價開始波動。它上漲了。

We stopped buying and it went back down to the level we were buying at. But at that period, we felt we had material nonpublic information. So we didn't feel it was appropriate or fair to buy stock in the market while we possess such information. So we didn't continue that program. But that's not to say in the future, if that's -- if the stock reaches a point that we feel it's an attractive and good use of capital, we absolutely will use that tool.

我們就停止買入，股價又回落到我們原本買入的水準。但在那段期間，我們認為我們掌握了重大未公開資訊。因此，在持有此類資訊的情況下於市場上買入股票，我們認為並不適當或不公平。所以我們沒有繼續該計畫。但這並不是說未來不會；如果——如果股價到達我們認為具有吸引力、且是良好資本運用的水準，我們絕對會使用這個工具。

Okay. Great. And just a quick question on L.A. I think you were targeting a 40-basis-point headwind from the rent restrictions. Just wanted to confirm that's still what you're expecting that's in line with your initial guide? And when that restriction is ultimately lifted, I think how quickly do you think you can get rates back to market?

好的。很好。另外關於洛杉磯（L.A.）有個快速問題。我記得你們原本預期租金限制會帶來40個基點的不利影響。想確認一下，這仍然是你們的預期、也與你們最初的指引一致嗎？以及當該限制最終解除時，你們認為多快可以把價格調回市場水準？

Yes, we do expect a 40-basis-point headwind assuming that the state of emergency is in play for the entire year. When this -- unfortunately, since COVID, we've had lots of experience with states of emergency and them getting lifted and what the appropriate strategy is after that. And when that happens, we'll get the right people around a table and look at the facts and situation as it is then and make a decision on what the appropriate strategy is.

是的，假設緊急狀態全年都持續，我們確實預期會有40個基點的不利影響。不幸的是，自COVID以來，我們對緊急狀態以及解除後的情況、以及解除後採取何種適當策略，已經有很多經驗。當那種情況發生時，我們會把合適的人召集到一起，根據當時的事實與情勢進行評估，並決定何者是適當的策略。

Michael Mueller, JPMorgan.

Michael Mueller，摩根大通（JPMorgan）。

Just one question here. There's been a lot of volatility over the past five to seven years. So I'm curious, what do you think is a normal level of same-store revenue growth in a normal environment?

我這裡只有一個問題。過去五到七年波動很大。所以我想了解，在正常環境下，你們認為同店營收成長的正常水準會是多少？

Yes, it's a great question, Mike. It certainly has been an unusual handful of years with the highest of highs, and then some periods that were relatively flat same-store revenue growth. If you look long term, it would be in the 4s range. That includes a few periods post the financial crisis where development was very suppressed for a long time and we were taking a lot of rate and occupancy in times. So maybe that's a little higher than the sustainable long-term average, but we certainly would target it being something above inflationary over time. And it's been relatively steady throughout that 20-plus year look as we've been a publicly traded company. Outside of the COVID years, there's not been a huge amount of volatility.

是的，Mike，這是個很好的問題。這幾年確實很不尋常，既有非常高的高點，也有一些同店營收成長相對持平的期間。如果看長期，會在4%左右的區間。這包含金融危機後有幾段期間，開發活動長時間受到很大抑制，而我們在某些時期能夠大幅提高價格與入住率。所以那可能略高於可持續的長期平均，但我們的目標仍會是長期而言高於通膨。而在我們作為上市公司超過20年的觀察期間，整體相對穩定。除了COVID那幾年之外，並沒有出現非常大的波動。

Eric Wolfe, Citi.

Eric Wolfe，花旗（Citi）。

Thanks for taking the follow-up, and sorry if I missed it. But on L.A., I know you said a moment ago that you still expect a 40-bps dilution, if you will. But I guess if you look at the fourth quarter, you're like negative 1-ish, now you're positive 1. I guess, what caused the sort of jump between the fourth quarter and the first quarter? And I guess, given your comments, like, I guess you would expect it to come back down for the rest of the year, like what would cause that?

謝謝讓我追問，如果我漏聽了也抱歉。但關於洛杉磯（L.A.），我知道你剛才說你們仍預期會有40個基點的稀釋（如果可以這麼說）。但我想如果看第四季，你們大概是負1左右，現在第一季是正1。那麼，第四季到第一季之間這種跳升是由什麼造成的？另外，根據你們的評論，我想你們會預期今年剩餘時間會回落，那會是由什麼導致的？

So the 40 basis points is a reference to the state of emergency in L.A. County. And our reported results have to do with the L.A. MSA. We have 122 stores in L.A. MSA, and 73 of those are in L.A. County. So our performance is driven largely by the stores outside of L.A. County, where we're restricted with what we can do with rates.

所以，40個基點是指洛杉磯郡（L.A. County）的緊急狀態所帶來的影響。而我們揭露的業績結果則是與洛杉磯（L.A.）都會統計區（MSA）相關。我們在洛杉磯MSA有122家門店，其中73家位於洛杉磯郡。因此，我們的表現主要是由洛杉磯郡以外的門店所驅動；在洛杉磯郡內，我們在調價方面受到限制。

And that kind of speaks to the acceleration that you're mentioning, Eric, being driven by those non-L.A. County properties. One observation that maybe is interesting is while we haven't seen rate growth at the same level in those L.A. County stores given the restrictions, we have seen occupancy build in L.A. County.

這也某種程度上解釋了你提到的加速，Eric，主要是由那些非洛杉磯郡的資產所帶動。一個可能有趣的觀察是：雖然在限制之下，我們沒有在洛杉磯郡門店看到同等幅度的租金成長，但我們確實看到洛杉磯郡的入住率在提升。

It's approximately 96% already, and we haven't even started the leasing season. So I think it shows the impact of those artificially suppressed market rates, which has also reduced churn in those properties since they're priced well below market.

目前大約已經到96%，而我們甚至還沒開始租賃旺季。所以我認為這顯示了那些被人為壓低的市場價格所帶來的影響；由於定價遠低於市價，也降低了這些資產的流失率（churn）。

So that headwind from the L.A. County properties will continue and increase throughout the year and the longer this remains in place. But fortunately, the properties throughout the rest of the MSA, as Joe mentioned, are performing really well and ahead of expectations, frankly.

因此，來自洛杉磯郡資產的不利影響將會持續，並且在全年期間、以及這項措施維持越久，就會越來越大。但幸運的是，正如Joe提到的，MSA其餘地區的資產表現非常好，坦白說也超出預期。

We have reached the end of the Q&A session. I will now turn the call back to Joe Margolis, CEO, for closing remarks.

問答環節到此結束。我現在把電話交回給執行長Joe Margolis作結語。

Great. Thank you. Thank you, everyone, for your time and your interest in Extra Space. Great questions, good conversation. As we said, we're very encouraged as the first four months of this year, we're running at a schedule, and the systems are working, and we're optimizing our performance. So we look forward to speaking with you after the second quarter. Thank you very much.

很好。謝謝。感謝各位撥冗並對Extra Space的關注。問題很棒，交流也很好。如同我們所說，我們對今年前四個月的表現感到非常鼓舞；我們按計畫推進，系統也在運作，我們正在最佳化我們的表現。因此，我們期待在第二季之後再與各位交流。非常感謝。

That concludes today's call. Thank you for attending. You may now disconnect.

今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位參與。您現在可以掛線。