Rexford Industrial Realty Inc (REXR) 2021 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Greetings. Welcome to the Rexford Industrial Realty, Inc. Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2021 Earnings Call. (Operator Instructions) Please note, this conference is being recorded.

I will now turn the conference over to your host, David Lanzer. You may begin.

We thank you for joining us for Rexford Industrial's Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2021 Earnings Conference Call.

In addition to the press release distributed yesterday after market close, we posted a supplemental package and an investor presentation in the Investor Relations section on our website at www.rexfordindustrial.com.

On today's call, management's remarks and answers to your questions may contain forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements address matters that are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ from those discussed today.

For more information about these risk factors, we encourage you to review our 10-K and other SEC filings. Rexford Industrial assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements in the future.

In addition, certain financial information presented on this call represents non-GAAP financial measures. Our earnings release and supplemental package present GAAP reconciliation and an explanation of why such non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors.

Today's conference call is hosted by Rexford Industrial's Co-Chief Executive Officers, Michael Frankel and Howard Schwimmer, together with Chief Financial Officer, Laura Clark. They will make some prepared remarks, and then we will open the call for your questions.

Now, I will turn the call over to Michael.

Thank you, David, and thank you, everyone, for joining our Rexford Industrial Fourth Quarter 2021 Earnings Call. We hope you and your families are well. I'll provide some brief remarks followed by Howard, who will discuss our transaction activity, and then Laura will provide an update on our financial metrics and guidance.

As we look back on 2021, we are struck by the unique strength of our Rexford platform, as we increased consolidated NOI by 38%, which drove a 24% increase in FFO per share for the full year. Rexford continues to differentiate itself as the nation's fastest-growing and strongest-performing industrial REIT with 5-year average annual FFO per share growth of 14%, average consolidated NOI growth of 31% and 5-year average dividend growth of 18%, all of which continue to lead the industrial sector.

We thank every Rexford teammate for your industry-leading work and dedication. To put this performance into perspective, our acquisitions team closed $1.9 billion of investments that are positioned to drive substantial cash flow growth and value creation.

On the leasing front, we completed nearly 7 million square feet of leasing volume and our leasing team drove average leasing spreads of 43% on a GAAP basis and 29% on a cash basis for the year. Our construction and development team completed over 1 million square feet of value-add projects generating an aggregate stabilized unlevered yield of 6.6% and creating over $165 million of incremental value creation.

Rexford's operations and property management teams continued to drive superior customer satisfaction metrics with historically low downtime and ended the year with our same property portfolio at over 99% occupancy. Our infill Southern California market fundamentals are as exceptional as our operating platform.

Tenant demand continues at an unprecedented level of intensity driven by an exceptionally broad and diverse range of sectors. With the highest demand and lowest vacancy in the nation, our Southern California infill market is currently operating at over 99% occupancy. We continue to experience an incurable supply-demand imbalance due to an extremely limited ability to increase net supply.

Consequently, market rent and property values are growing at a substantially higher pace within infill Southern California as compared to all other major markets across the nation. It is also important to note that our infill Southern California industrial market represents the world's fourth largest market, behind only the entire countries of the United States, China and Germany.

Infill Southern California is not only the largest and most fragmented industrial market in the nation, but the value of our market is about the same as the next 5 largest U.S. markets combined. Consequently, as our proprietary research-driven originations methods enable our unique access to this vast market, we are capitalizing upon a substantial opportunity to grow well beyond our current 2% market share.

As we look forward, we've never been better positioned to grow our cash flow and value. From an internal growth perspective, we currently project over $120 million of annualized NOI growth, representing a 30% increase embedded within our in-place portfolio over the next 24 months, which includes approximately $28 million of incremental NOI, as our redevelopment and repositioning projects stabilized; approximately $38 million of incremental NOI from recent acquisitions and approximately $55 million of incremental NOI contributed as we roll below-market rents to higher market rates.

In fact, the mark-to-market on rental rates for our entire portfolio is now estimated at 41% on a cash basis and 51% on a net effective basis. In addition, we have a substantial pipeline of new accretive investments with over $450 million of acquisitions under contract or accepted offer, plus an extensive originations pipeline beyond this volume.

To fuel our growth, we are favorably positioned with a low leverage, best-in-class balance sheet, closing the year at 9.1% debt to enterprise value. Finally, as a reflection of the company's strong performance, we are pleased to announce that we're increasing our dividend by over 31%.

And with that, I'm very pleased to turn the call over to Howard.

Thank you, Michael, and thank you, everyone, for joining us today. Southern California rental rate growth continues to substantially exceed all other major markets. Based on Rexford's internal portfolio metrics, our market rents increased by 38% over the prior year. The significant acceleration from recent quarters underscores the strength of our Southern California markets.

Market-wide, according to CBRE, our target infill markets, which exclude the Inland Empire East, ended the quarter at 0.8% vacancy. The lack of availability within our supply-constrained infill markets is expected to continue and positions us well to capture strong rent spreads into the foreseeable future.

The consolidated portfolio weighted average mark-to-market for our 4.9 million square feet of 2022 lease expirations is now estimated at 48% on a cash basis and 58% on a net effective basis. Our same-store portfolio achieved historical high average occupancy of 99% for the fourth quarter. And while we did not have much available space to lease, our strong leasing performance continued during the quarter with approximately 1 million square feet of leases signed, realizing blended GAAP and cash spreads of about 34% and 22%, respectively.

Turning to external growth. In the fourth quarter, we completed 19 acquisitions totaling $551 million, which included 2 million square feet of buildings on 104 acres of land, including 12.8 acres of land for near-term redevelopment with approximately 80% of the acquisition value add. These acquisitions generate an aggregate initial yield of 2.6% and an estimated 5.2% unlevered stabilized yield.

For the full year, we completed 51 acquisitions for an aggregate purchase price of $1.9 billion, adding 5.7 million square feet of buildings on 426 acres of land. This includes 123 acres of low-coverage industrial outdoor storage sites and 53 acres of land for near-term redevelopment.

In aggregate, these acquisitions generate an initial yield of 3.6% and an estimated 6.1% unlevered stabilized yield. For the full year 2021, 86% of our acquisitions were acquired through off-market or lightly marketed transactions sourced through our proprietary research-driven processes and deep market relationships.

On the disposition front, for the year, we sold 5 properties totaling $59.3 million, which generated an aggregate 26.5% unlevered IRR on investment. As in the past, we expect to continue to sell assets opportunistically to unlock value and recycle capital.

Subsequent to year-end, we completed $170 million of acquisitions, which were predominantly value-add opportunities with an aggregate 3.1% initial yield that are projected to generate an aggregate 4.9% stabilized unlevered yield on total investment.

Looking ahead, we currently have $450 million of new investments under LOI or contract. These transactions are subject to customary due diligence with no guarantee of closing. We will keep you apprised as transactions are consummated.

Turning to repositioning and redevelopment activities. For the full year, we stabilized 6 properties, representing over $200 million of total investment at an aggregate unlevered stabilized yield on total investment of 6.6%, substantially exceeding current market cap rates that are in the mid-3% range.

We currently have over 3 million square feet of current and planned value-add and redevelopment projects across our portfolio with a projected total incremental investment of approximately $380 million and are estimated to deliver an aggregate return on total investment of about 6.6%, representing more than $1 billion in estimated value creation.

And with that, I'm pleased to now turn the call over to Laura.

Thank you, Howard. Fourth quarter results came in ahead of projections with same-property NOI growth on a GAAP basis at 10% and 6.8% on a cash basis. Note that cash same-property NOI growth was 13% when normalized for 2020 COVID-related impacts.

Continued occupancy gains and exceptional leasing spreads contributed to our strong growth. Average same-property occupancy in the quarter was 99%, up 40 basis points sequentially and 80 basis points over the prior year. Leasing spreads for the full year were 43% and 29% on a GAAP and cash basis, respectively.

Additionally, annual embedded rent steps on our new and renewal leases continue to increase with average steps at 3.9% on fourth quarter executed leases. For the full year, same-property NOI growth exceeded expectations at 9.1% on a GAAP basis and 12.3% on a cash basis. Cash NOI growth for the full year was an impressive 10.9% even when normalized for COVID-related impacts. Occupancy growth, robust leasing spreads and our remarkably stable tenant base as measured by the fact that we had 0 bad debt expense for the full year, collectively enabled us to grow fourth quarter core FFO per share by 32% to $0.45 per share and full year core FFO per share by 24% to $1.64 per share.

Driven by this strong performance, the board declared a dividend of $0.315 per share representing an increase of over 31%, demonstrating Rexford's commitment to delivering superior total shareholder returns.

Turning now to balance sheet and capital markets activities. We continue to execute on our strategy to maintain a low leverage investment-grade balance sheet that is proven through all phases of the capital cycle. And at year-end, net debt-to-EBITDA was 3.6x.

In the fourth quarter, S&P and Fitch recognized our favorable position, revising the rating outlook for Rexford to positive from stable. Capital markets transactions executed in the quarter include: the sale of 4.2 million shares of common stock through the ATM on a forward basis at an average price of $70.17 per share.

In December, we settled forward equity agreements associated with our September public offering and fourth quarter ATM activity, issuing approximately 8.8 million shares for net proceeds of $534 million. And subsequent to quarter end, we renewed our ATM program, which includes $750 million of capacity.

At quarter end, our liquidity was approximately $880 million, including $44 million of cash, $134 million of forward equity proceeds remaining for settlement from our fourth quarter ATM sales and full availability on our $700 million credit facility.

Before we turn the call over for your questions, I'll provide an overview of our 2022 outlook. Our 2022 projected core FFO guidance range is $1.77 to $1.81 per share representing 9% earnings growth at the midpoint. As a reminder, this guidance range does not include acquisitions, dispositions or related balance sheet activities that have not yet closed.

We have provided a roll forward detailing the drivers of our guidance in our supplemental package. A few highlights include same-property NOI growth on a cash basis is projected to be 6% to 7%. Excluding the year-over-year impact of COVID-related repayments, cash same-property NOI is projected to be 6.5% to 7.5%. Same-property GAAP NOI growth is projected to be 3.25% to 4.25%.

Assumptions driving same-property growth include average occupancy of 98% to 98.5%, leasing spreads of approximately 40%. Higher expenses net of recoveries are projected to offset same-property growth by approximately 110 basis points and bad debt as a percent of revenue of 35 basis points compared to 0 in 2021.

Our 2021 acquisitions are projected to contribute incremental NOI in the range of $48 million to $51 million in 2022 when compared to their contribution in 2021. G&A expenses are projected to be $58 million to $59 million, and includes [$23] (sic, see press release, "$23.1 million") million of noncash performance-based equity compensation, which is only realized to the extent the company achieves exceptional performance and superior shareholder returns.

And finally, net interest expense is projected to be in the range of $38 million to $39 million. This completes our prepared remarks, and we now welcome your questions. Operator?

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from the line of Jamie Feldman with Bank of America.

So I guess just to start out, I appreciate all the moving pieces you gave on guidance. You had a really strong same-store year in '21. It's moderating in '22. Can you just help us understand kind of the biggest moving pieces of why it's going to be slower next year given you have the 41% cash mark-to-market, 51% GAAP?

Jamie, I'll take that one. Thanks for your question. I think it would be helpful to walk through -- walk you through the components of same property and happy to dive into any of these a little bit further once I walk through the components.

So our cash same-property NOI growth is projected to be 6% to 7%. And the components of that include about 810 basis points of growth related to base rent. Assumptions driving that include 2022 leasing spreads of 40% and then our occupancy guidance of 98% to 98.5%. It does imply a decline in occupancy. We're currently sitting year-end occupancy in the same property pool at 99.1% and average occupancy in the full year was at 98.6% in 2021.

Bad debt as a percent of revenue is projected to be 35 basis points, and that's offsetting the same property growth by about 50 basis points. I'll note that our tenants are certainly performing really well. And -- but we are assuming a more normalized level of bad debt. Bad debt free COVID was in the 40 to 50 basis point area.

And then finally, the last component of same-property guidance is around expense growth. And we're estimating the expense growth of about 12%, and that offsets net expense -- net of recoveries offsets same-property NOI by about 110 basis points. So a little bit of color there, insurance taxes and overhead allocation are the most significant component of that expense growth. And while the increases in insurance and taxes are passed through to our tenants and are recoverable, our increases in overhead allocation are nonrecoverable. So those are your -- the significant components that get you to the 6.5% at the midpoint of our cash in property guidance.

Okay. That's very helpful. And then sticking with the expense increase that you mentioned. I mean, is that projected or you pretty much feel like that's in the bag based on how much expenses have moved even into -- in the fourth -- as recently as the fourth quarter?

Yes. So let's dive down a little bit to the expenses, net of recoveries, right? And so the largest driver of that is around overhead allocation.

So when you think about overhead allocation and the drivers there, so our portfolio growth, certainly in the past 2 years, has been substantial. Our square footage of our portfolio has increased 40%. Our consolidated NOI growth over the last 2 years has been 70%. So -- and we're also certainly thinking about the future growth prospects, right?

We've acquired $170 million to date and have another $450 million in the pipeline that's under contract or accepted offer. So this is certainly contributing to the growth in our head count. And I think one thing to think about, Jamie, is the timing of hiring can ebb and flow. So there can be points and time from a hiring perspective where there's a catch-up. There can also be times in hiring where we are looking ahead and thinking about the growth and the future growth of the portfolio.

So when you think about what's fully baked in, so that growth is -- part of that growth is a component of hires that occurred in 2021 and more so in the back half of 2021 and we're realizing the full impact of that. The other component that I think is important to mention is that our team is certainly performing at exceptional levels that led to some promotions at the end of the year, and congrats to all those team members and some increases in overall compensation.

And then like many others, we are experiencing the impact of increased labor costs as well. So that's -- those are the key components of that growth in overhead allocation.

Okay. And then just to confirm, so you said 6.5% to 7.5% is the cash growth number excluding COVID. So that's kind of a clean number of just how the portfolio is acting?

Yes, that's correct. Yes. Just as a general reminder, COVID deferrals were granted in the second quarter. Most of our COVID deferrals were granted to in the second quarter of 2020 and represented less than 1.5% of our ADR.

So although the bulk of those COVID deferrals were granted in 2020 and collected about 80% in 2020, we did collect the remainder of those deferrals in 2021, which was about $1 million. And so our 2022 collections of COVID impact is pretty insignificant. So when you look at the year-over-year cash and property growth, it's positively impacted by the decline in the COVID adjustment.

So that's that additional 50 basis points at the midpoint and our 6.5% to 7.5% guidance on cash in property NOI.

Okay. And then last for me. So you did $1.9 billion of acquisitions in '21 -- sorry -- yes, in '21 and what do you think is realistic in terms of the acquisition volume you could do this year? You've got $450 million under contract now.

Jamie, it's Howard. I hope you're well. Well, I think you've asked this question before and every time we told you we just don't offer guidance on the acquisitions.

But that said, we are starting out the year with a robust pipeline. I would say that January, February seem to be our slower months, and we've already closed $170 million. So we're excited for the year. We see a strong pipeline of opportunities. And it's hard to predict, obviously, what closes and what else we put under contract, but we're starting out with a lot of momentum, and we hope to have another banner year.

I guess maybe a better way to ask it is, has anything changed in your desirability or desire to put out capital this year versus maybe this time last year, whether it's pricing or what's on the market or potential sellers.

Jamie, it's Michael. Thanks so much for the question. I would say that our focus remains the same in that we're focused on acquiring transactions and buying opportunities that provide us with the level of cash flow growth that would greatly exceed even the impacts associated with an inflationary environment or even increasing interest rates.

And I think you see the team doing that. And so what we've done at Rexford, we really doubled down on our ability to originate and execute on value-add opportunities. So the vast majority of what we bought last year, as you know, were through off-market and lightly marketed transactions that gave rise to mostly value-add opportunities. If you look at the value-add projects that we're solving to 6.6% last year, over 1 million square feet. The near-term value-add projects also solved to just under 7%, 6.6%. I mean that's about double the market yields that are achieved by our competitors here in infill Southern California.

And you look at the in-place mark-to-market on what we're buying. That's because we're originating opportunities, by the way, that are not generally available to our competitors on the acquisition front, oftentimes with deeply embedded below market rents. And so that's really the focus.

And I think as we double down in that value creation capability, we're digging deeper in the markets. Our team is better than ever, stronger than ever. And that's why you see -- that's why I think you see the quality of investments. So I think that's really how we hedge against things that you're -- I think you're referring to in terms of increasing costs and such inflation in the environment in general.

Our next question comes from the line of Manny Korchman with Citi.

Howard, just going back to your comments on how quickly rental rates are growing in the market, do you think at some point, there's going to be a bigger impact on retention than we've seen thus far?

Well, we're operating at less than 1% vacancy. And as far as retention, there's nowhere for tenants to go. So the market is going to have to change dramatically in terms of the vacancy rate for there to be options for people.

We've mentioned in the past, a lot of times, we have repositioning projects that we're planning to do where we have a tenant that we want to exit, maybe it's a property that has got some dysfunctionality to it, and they're just begging us to renew because there's nowhere to go in the marketplace.

And those are -- some of those are even unexpected, as I mentioned, in terms of the retention side. So for the foreseeable future, I think we're going to expect to be operating in a similar manner and retain retention. But keep in mind, I'm saying a lot of the retention in terms of what tenants move out are really at our option so that we can get to these assets, as Michael was describing and go in and create value above and beyond what we might even be able to get from a tenant even if they do want to review -- renew.

But in some instances, tenants are so desperate for space. They're paying us rents that far exceed what we ever thought an existing building might be worth, and we are retaining them. And we'll just move forward on the value creation plan a little further down the road.

And in the past, we've always discussed the off-market nature of your acquisitions and maybe less professionally managed assets that you've been buying. Are they having the same successes with those tenants paying those higher rents? Or are they happy to -- even though market rates are where they are, are they happy to keep the continuity of tenant and they're actually renewing lower. And so when you're buying the assets even though leases might have just turned, cash flows aren't where they could potentially be?

Right. Most of the assets we buy are not recently leased and adjusted to market rents. We tend to typically target assets that have below market rents in place because they've been leased for a while. In fact, looking at our data from our fourth quarter acquisitions, in aggregate, in-place rents were about 38% below market on those outsets we bought.

And the typical owner in our market, the individuals or the smaller partnerships, they're shocked when somebody tells them what their property is worth, and they're also surprised when they do a renewal, and they get a bit more rent than they were thinking about. But a lot of times getting more rent also requires them to modernize and make larger capital investments in their buildings, which most of the time they're not willing to do especially since the market is so tight and they don't have to spend a penny to still retain occupancy and even get rent growth.

And again, that rent growth they're getting is still well below what that could be if somebody like Rexford came in and invested a little bit of capital and really just unlock the value of those assets.

Our next question comes from the line of Connor Siversky with Berenberg.

Everybody, and thanks for having me on the call. I appreciate the detail as always. A question on leasing spreads that we saw during 4Q. So I think you had mentioned that the mark-to-market on the portfolio is about 41%, and that is the number baked into guidance.

So I'm wondering what could explain the delta between that 41% number and the 21.5% cash spread posted for 4Q '21. So just for a little context, I'm operating under the assumption that some of the leases that would have expired during the quarter or of an older tenor, it may have been even lower on the mark-to-market. So any color there would be appreciated.

Sure. This is Howard, Connor. So our lower spreads were mostly impacted by a couple of larger renewals. And that really represented 30% of the square footage, that 1 million square feet of leasing in the quarter. We had a 182,000-foot building in our Rancho Pacifica project in the South Bay, where we're working on a longer-term blend and extend with a couple of spaces of tenant occupiers. So we renewed 182,000 feet on a short-term lease 7 months, but it met the parameters of being included in the calculations, and that only had a 3.5% cash spread.

And we had 112,000 foot building in the San Diego market, and that had an in-place below-market option to extend at a fixed rate, and that had a 4.2% cash spread. So those were a huge influence on those leasing spreads. But when you look at our new leasing, and we didn't have much space delays, so we didn't have as much new leasing in the quarter but our new leasing spreads were still very strong. We had 46% GAAP spreads and 31.5% cash spread. So those are more typically what you hear us talking about but at 99.1% occupancy there just isn't a lot of space in our portfolio that we're able to lease in that past quarter.

Okay. But just to clarify, the 41% number that's sort of what's being baked into 2022 guidance? .

Do you want to take that, Laura?

Connor, it's Laura. Yes. I'll add a little color there and then talk about 2022 as well. I think it's important when you think about 2021 to look at the full year because certainly on a quarter-to-quarter basis, the mix issue can certainly impact the results in an individual quarter.

But when you look forward to 2022, the mark-to-market on our 2022 expirations is 48% on a cash basis. So we're looking forward seeing some pretty significant mark-to-market and our guidance assumes around 40% at the midpoint, 40% leasing spreads on our 2022 expirations.

It's Michael. I'll just add one thing. The spreads are one component of growth for the quarter and for the year. And Q4 actually saw an acceleration in overall growth by key metrics.

For instance, core FFO grew by 61.5% for the quarter, which was a much higher rate than the annualized growth of 44%. On a per share basis, we grew core FFO per share of 32%, 32.5% for the quarter, a much higher rate than the 24.2% for the year. So I think overall, Q4 was actually an acceleration in terms of cash flow growth for the company.

Okay. And then could you just remind us then what in-place escalators look like?

Go ahead, Laura.

Okay. I'll take it. So overall, the portfolio rent steps are now in place at 3.1% for the total portfolio. But we've certainly seen the ability to increase those across the leases that we've signed through 2021. And that -- and those rent escalations continue to actually accelerate.

If you look at the average rent steps that we signed in the fourth quarter, they were 3.9%, and that's up from 3.6% in the third quarter. So if you look at the full year the average rent steps that we signed on all of our leasing was 3.4%. So we're seeing that in-place portfolio number move up. It takes a little bit of time to move that number forward, but we're seeing in some markets, in some cases, the ability to capture 4.5% to 5% rent bump is becoming more common in the market.

Okay. And one more for me. Looking at construction activity, I mean, let's just focus on the Inland Empire specifically. So I'm seeing about 30 million square feet under construction, about 28 million of that is spec. So I know you have some presence in the market, but I'm just thinking out loud.

Is it a possibility that some of the tenants in the L.A. Basin could provide the same service to L.A. proper from the Inland Empire. I mean, is there a situation where we could see some kind of diffusion from your tenants out of L.A. into the Inland Empire? Or does that seem unlikely?

We've always seen that, Connor. I mean the Inland Empire has been the relief for the lack of supply in the infill markets. That's changed though recently because there's very limited supply availability in the Inland Empire. And a lot or most of that product you see coming out of the ground lately either as pre-leased or ones that becoming leased right at completion.

So it's just been an amazing amount of absorption that we've seen in that market and frankly, in all of our markets. And what's also very interesting is the Inland Empire used to have substantially lower rents than some of the more closer and infill markets. And when we look at it today, the spread between the rents in Inland Empire and some of the more western markets is much more narrow. So it's really more of a question of do you need a higher quality building? Or do you need a location?

And then the other side of it also is that while the Inland Empire is only like 45 minutes or an hour plus away from some of these other markets. Tenants have to strategically be located in these infill markets to service their customers and they actually can't do it a lot of times if they're in the Inland Empire.

So you find people's needs a lot different that are able to locate in the Inland Empire than the tenants in the infill markets that really are there because their businesses have to be there.

Got it. That's very helpful. I'll leave it there.

And just to be clear, Connor, that type of volume in terms of construction in the Eastern Inland Empire and deliveries has been pretty consistent now for, I don't know, 5 to 7 years. And we really haven't seen that impact demand or rental rate growth in our infill markets.

Just to be clear, and I think that's what Howard was referring to when he said we've seen this in the past, it's been recurring, but we -- but what we don't see is the new construction deliveries in the Eastern Empire impacting demand in our infill markets, which is more -- I think, more to your question.

Yes. No, I was just really curious about whether or not that 28 million square feet of spec development would have been somewhat of a concern, but the color makes sense.

And our next question comes from the line of Dave Rodgers with Baird.

I just wanted to ask about the redevelopments. I think you had said $200 million completed in '21, $380 million either planned or current. But is that the plan to start this year here in 2022?

And then I guess, maybe can you talk a little bit about the scope and how that might be changing in some of the projects? Are you generally trying to open spaces up because you see more warehouse storage, are you cutting spaces up for more service orientation, I assume maybe the answer is a little bit everything, but just curious on your thoughts.

Sure. Dave, it's Howard. So -- in total, we have over 3 million square feet of projects. That's probably 28 different buildings we'll be building over the next 2 years. And that has an incremental spend of about $350 million with about $1 billion of value creation and stabilizing its strong yields about 6.5%.

In terms of 2022, we'll have 15 projects start with an incremental spend of about $200 million. And those will stabilize anywhere from second quarter of '23, the second quarter of 2024 also at similar stabilized return projected of 6.7% on total cost.

And then in terms of any changes to the product, I think what we've seen in the market today is that people want a bit more space on site to store containers. You want higher dock counts, and we're delivering that. So in some instances, we could make that work with higher coverage on the site, meaning typically around the norm of 50%.

And in some instances, we'll deliver sites that have excess land. Some of our repositioning is, in fact, we're tearing down pieces of buildings and creating what we call low coverage sites that have an extensive amount of loading and very large excess land areas for container storage.

And those are becoming in more demand as well as even just yard space that we're running, these industrial outdoor storage sites that have little to no improvement on the site and are just used for storage of containers. You can only do that in selective areas. Most cities are very difficult in terms of allowing for those exterior yards, but we've had a lot of success of buying sites that had buy-right ability to do container storage and we're achieving substantial returns on those sites as well.

Great. I appreciate that color. And then maybe, Laura, just 1 follow-up for you. And I realize that may be apples to oranges your interest expense guidance is, I think, down in '22 versus '21, and I know the acquisitions aren't in there.

But maybe imply for us anything with respect to the preferred, I think maybe you have coming due as well as thoughts on kind of equity versus using debt in that mix to kind of change that interest expense outlook as the year progresses.

Yes. So the interest expense guidance has been driven. The decline is being driven by a couple of components. Our guidance is $38 million to $39 million. We ended the year 2021 was a little bit over $40 million.

So it's driven by really a couple of factors. One is higher capitalized interest. As Howard just mentioned, we expect to start pretty significant amount of projects. When we look at our projected spend in '22, it's about $180 million, and that compares to about $65 million in 2021. So that's driving higher capitalized interest.

And then the other -- we had some onetime items in our '21 interest expense related to a termination of some interest rate swaps. And so those have burned off and are not impacting 2022. So it is a little bit of a comp issue.

And then to answer your question in terms of how to think about funding and the balance sheet going forward, we certainly held very well positioned from a liquidity standpoint, do have about $134 million of proceeds remaining from forward issuance. And then we just renewed our $750 million ATM program. So we have full availability there.

And no -- as of the end of the year, no balance on our credit facility. So certainly, a number of sources of liquidity from that standpoint. And as we look forward into 2022, I think our funding strategy is going to look really similar to 2021.

We're going to take an opportunistic approach to our capital raises. Our net debt-to-EBITDA is sitting at 3.6x. Our target level is in the 4 to 4.5x. So I think that in 2022, you'll see us tap into the debt and equity markets as you have in the past to fund future acquisition opportunities.

Our next question comes from the line of Mike Mueller with JPMorgan.

Laura, I was just wondering what's the big difference between the cash and GAAP same-store NOI growth, the difference between those 2 metrics? Because when I think of the GAAP number, my mind goes to you got mid-teens expirations. If you're assuming 40% cash spreads or GAAP spreads based on the prior comments are probably 50%. So 50% to 15% kind of get you in the high single digits. So there seems like there's an offset. .

Yes, it's a great question, Mike. So the difference between our GAAP and cash spread in our guidance is about 275 basis points. Just to put that into some historical context, over the past 4 years, that gap between GAAP and cash has been about in the 175 to 200 basis point range if we look back over the past 4 years.

In 2021, that gap was about 320 basis points with about -- with COVID impact relating to about 140 basis points of that impact. So -- if you look forward to 2022 and the 275 basis point spread, it's relative to historical to about 100 basis points higher.

So it's really related to lower projected noncash income that's really split evenly between a few factors. First is COVID impacts represent about 1/3 of that spread -- that 100 basis points at excess spread, and that's down from 140 basis points, as I mentioned, in 2021.

The second impact is around lower -- above the low market, noncash expense and that's really related to a couple of things are happening in above below. One is we're certainly converting below market rents to higher cash rents. And then the second is that in 2021, we did have some onetime impacts around -- we had some proactive move outs where we were able to take some space back and convert those to higher market rents, but then that does generate some larger onetime impacts in 2021 that hit above below. So that's kind of another 1/3 of that outsized spread.

And then the last component is a decline in straight-line rent assumptions. And there's a number of things that can kind of impact your straight-line rent assumptions and projections. And so one of those is lower average occupancy, which I discussed, timing of our lease expirations going to have -- it can be another driver and just the overall amount of activity that we are projecting to lease as well. So that was about another 1/3 of that outside spread. So -- those are what's driving the lower noncash in 2022.

(Operator Instructions) Our next question comes from the line of Chris Lucas with Capital One Securities.

Howard, maybe I'll just start with you on a bigger picture question, which relates to your lease expiration schedule. If I look at not just this coming year but the next 5 years after that, the expirations are around the same rent levels. Is there anything in the '22 mix that where -- that generates that 40-plus percent mark-to-market? Or is it if -- or can I assume that if the environment stays the same over the next 6 years that the 40%, 50% kind of mark-to-market is really kind of embedded throughout the entire rest of the lease expiration schedule. .

Well, Chris, maybe I'll talk just a little quickly about this year's expirations, and I'll let Laura add a little color on the latter years. In terms of this year, our top 20 leases is about 1.65 million feet. So that's 1/3 of what's expiring.

And what's interesting of that is that today, we either no assets are moving to repositioning or they're expected to renew. So very little of it is going to be vacant. And then in terms of those lease spreads, the biggest driver is probably in the largest amount of exploration. This year, 26% has been our Inland Empire West portfolio, where we have 67% mark-to-market followed by mid-county is at 52%.

And that's really the components of how we get to that 48% mark-to-market. And in terms of a look forward, none of us know obviously what happens in the marketplace years for now. But you've seen us adjust our mark-to-market pretty significantly, just literally from the third quarter of last year to now -- through the fourth quarter, I think we had 27% up to the 48% or I might be giving the wrong number.

27% to 41%, Howard.

41%, sorry. So the market is moving incredibly fast. And it's no -- it's not really dictating what happens in the future. So hard to predict. I don't know, Laura, do you have any other thoughts on the future spreads?

Before we go to the future spreads, Chris, it's Michael. But just a little more color on this year's contribution from the lease expirations, which is -- it's a little bit back ended. And this relates also to Jamie's earlier question because it also impacts the same property pool NOI growth, et cetera, for the year.

So you have about 60% of the volume expires during the second half of the year, but also the rent spreads are not equal throughout the year. So rent spreads are materially higher during the second half of the year for those expirations as compared to the first half of the year. So I think also part of your question, Chris, was is it an equal contribution sort of through the year, and it's not. It's weighted towards the second half of the year.

That's really helpful. I appreciate that. Laura, did you want to comment about the sort of the outage? I guess I'm just trying to understand whether or not it is mix that driving this extraordinarily strong lease spread expectation? Or is it something that is sort of just embedded in the portfolio for -- across the board. And that's really the point of the question.

Yes. I mean -- and that's a good question. I mean, when you look at 2022 is at 48% and then the overall portfolio average mark-to-market at 41%. So that implies a little bit lower potential mark-to-market in the upcoming years. If we look at 2023, it's about a little bit under 40% to about 38%, in 2024, at this point is about 35%. So that gives you a little bit more visibility into the cadence there from a mark-to-market perspective.

Great. That's very helpful. Laura, I've got just a couple of detailed follow-ups. On the noncash comp, you mentioned you got the $23.1 million of guide. Is there any of that, that is sort of locked in based on prior grants that are vesting or is this a floating number? Just trying to understand how much is variable.

Yes. I mean, Chris, that $23 million is based on performance and is would -- is paid out over the next 3 years. So -- and the metrics that detail exactly what -- exactly how that's paid out is in our proxy and 10-K. But big picture, it's tied to absolute earnings growth as well as relative total shareholder return.

So those are not realized until we hit those measurement points in each year.

Okay. And then just -- while it's not a big issue currently, as you think about guide, how do you deal with -- or how do you -- what's your assumptions as it relates to the unexercised forward ATM? How do you factor that into your guidance since you're not assuming acquisitions as part of the guidance. I was just trying to understand where that filters through.

Yes. Well, Chris, if you think about year-to-date, we have acquired $170 million, and I have $134 million outstanding on the forward. So I think from a forward perspective, you could -- there's an assumption baked in on funding that $170 million. And certainly, that forward -- those forward proceeds could be contributed to funding, that could be year-to-date.

Okay. And last question for me. Just you mentioned -- some of you mentioned earlier that there were a couple of fixed renewals or unique renewals that sort of impacted that number. Just curious as to how much of the portfolio has fixed renewal options to it.

Very, very little. Occasionally, we buy an asset and it may have an in-place lease were settled with somebody else made a bad decision on, which was the case with that one I mentioned in the San Diego market.

But overall -- and I don't have an exact number in front of me, but overall, I would say it's very little. Rexford never gives anybody a fixed option. Everything is at market.

I was going to say, in 20 years of doing this, I can't remember ever providing that good lease.

Our next question comes from the line of Blaine Heck with Wells Fargo.

Laura, just following up on the same-store expense growth. How should we think about this nonrecoverable overhead allocation affecting same-store growth going forward past this year? I mean, I think it's clear you guys are looking to keep growing.

But after these new hires and raises, do you think you're at a point at which you think your scale can kind of minimize this as a headwind in future years? Or are there any other ways to kind of mitigate it as you grow into the future?

Blaine, it's a good question. And while we're not going to provide 2023 guidance today, I'm happy to provide a little bit more color around how you think about the cadence.

So I think as I mentioned -- as we mentioned kind of the timing of hiring and certainly ebb and flow on a year-to-year basis. And in some cases, there can be some catch-up. So when you think about -- when you think about where we were at the end of 2020 and going into the beginning of 2021, very much operating in a COVID environment with a lot of uncertainty, we were still growing pretty rapidly, but I would say that maybe hiring slowed to some extent. And so there could be years where there is a little bit of a catch-up.

So in a way, you could look at 2021, and it could be -- that -- our overhead could have been understated in a way. We certainly -- through the hiring that occurred in 2021 was more back-end weighted in this overhead allocation bucket. So you're seeing the full impact of a little bit of that catch-up into 2022. And then obviously, as we look forward, we want to make sure that we're staying ahead to some extent, right? Not too far ahead, but certainly staying ahead that allows us -- it gives us the ability to grow.

So I think from an overall G&A perspective, you're seeing the benefits -- we are seeing the benefits of our scale, right? And when you look at G&A as a percent of revenue for 2021 was 10.8% and -- that was down from 11.2% in 2020. And we've seen that number continue to tick down every year for the past 4 or 5 years. So -- and we expect to stay on that same trend in 2022. So we certainly are recognizing the synergies within the platform. And I think what we're seeing here from an overhead allocation perspective is a little bit of an impact of timing issues.

Great. That makes a lot of sense.

And Blaine, just to add to that briefly, I -- we talk a lot about operating leverage in the business. We've talked a lot about it since our IPO roadshow in 2013, and it's very important to us. we think it's the hallmark of a great company that we do have very strong embedded operating leverage built into the business that we do believe we'll be accelerating into the next, call it, 2 to 5 years.

And I think if you look at the performance of the company, it's kind of all reflected in your FFO per share growth, right, at the end of the day in our FFO growth. And the level of FFO and FFO per share growth and AFFO growth that we're driving is increasing pretty dramatically. And another measure, in my view of operating leverage is the amount of internally generated cash that we're generating that we can use towards driving our internal growth, which is very substantial and growing, and that's very accretive for shareholders.

So I think we look at across a range of metrics, and I think we're really well positioned for the company to be increasing that level of margin and NOI margin and operating leverage that is embedded in the business model as we grow here.

That's helpful. And sticking with you or maybe even Howard, given the ramp-up we've seen an investment into redevelopment and repositioning and it seems like you guys are going to continue there. I wanted to ask about the upward pressure that we've seen on construction costs and labor and how you guys are dealing with those increasing costs or maybe even mitigating that exposure somehow?

Sure. I'll take that one. Well, yes, there's no mystery. Obviously, construction costs have been rising and doing so very rapidly. What we're doing is trying to buy out some of the commodity-type materials early on.

I'll give you an example, for instance, the roof systems. We're buying those literally 14 months prior to when we need them to lock in those prices and to avoid the further price increases that are happening in those. And then there's steel, fire sprinkler systems, roofing materials, those are all things that we can buy out early on in these projects and mitigate some of those cost increases. So we have a very thoughtful approach to it.

And I think it's going to show in terms of how you'll see the yields growing in our projected returns. And you saw that quarter-over-quarter in most all of our assets that are under redevelopment or repositioning where we had expanding yields.

And we have reached the end of the question-and-answer session. I'll now turn the call over to management for closing remarks.

Well on behalf of the entire Rexford Company and our Board of Directors, we want to thank everybody for joining us today. Stay well, stay healthy, and we look forward to reconnecting in a few months. Thank you, everyone.

This concludes today's conference, and you may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.