IRM vs NSA

For growth investors, Iron Mountain Incorporated (IRM) is the stronger pick with 12.

2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 3% for National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA). National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) offers the better valuation at 59. 9x trailing P/E (79. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Iron Mountain Incorporated (IRM) a "Buy" — based on 20 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) is the cheapest at 59.

9x versus Iron Mountain Incorporated at 268. 8x. On forward P/E, Iron Mountain Incorporated is actually cheaper at 58. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Iron Mountain Incorporated (IRM) delivered a total return of +275.

4%, compared to +16. 4% for National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IRM returned +321. 4% versus NSA's +178. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

81β versus Iron Mountain Incorporated's 1. 10β — meaning IRM is approximately 36% more volatile than NSA relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Iron Mountain Incorporated (IRM) is pulling ahead at 12.

2% versus -2. 3% for National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Iron Mountain Incorporated grew EPS -19. 7% year-over-year, compared to -40. 7% for National Storage Affiliates Trust. Over a 3-year CAGR, IRM leads at 10. 6% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) is the more profitable company, earning 9.

8% net margin versus 2. 1% for Iron Mountain Incorporated — meaning it keeps 9. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NSA leads at 37. 0% versus 20. 4% for IRM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NSA leads at 46. 0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

On forward earnings alone, Iron Mountain Incorporated (IRM) trades at 58.

4x forward P/E versus 79. 6x for National Storage Affiliates Trust — 21. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IRM: 0. 5% to $132. 33.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) offers the highest yield at 5. 4%, versus 2. 3% for Iron Mountain Incorporated (IRM).

For long-horizon retirement investors, National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

81), 5. 4% yield, +178. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NSA: +178. 4%, IRM: +321. 4%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Real Estate sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: IRM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; NSA is a small-cap income-oriented stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.