Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Equity LifeStyle Properties, Inc.
How Equity LifeStyle Properties, Inc. stacks up
ELS · against 730 other Real Estate companies
Growth
46/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #392 of 731 · scores higher than 46% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score73 peers with a growth score of 40–49, including ELS · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 46?
Weighted metrics compared with all Real Estate companies.Its metrics sit close to the Real Estate norm.
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 2.3% vs peer median 3.8%
- Earnings per share growth is close to the peer norm. Earnings per share growth: 7.6% vs peer median 11.2%
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 2.5% vs peer median 3.0%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = ELS, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | ELS | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 741 reported | 2.5% | 3.0% | 49% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 464 reported | 7.6% | 11.1% | 46% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 718 reported | 2.3% | 3.8% | 42% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around ELS| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.1B USD | 100 | 53 | |
| 1 | 65.5B INR (≈$786M) | 100 | 57 | |
| 1 | 6.3B THB (≈$176M) | 100 | 77 | |
| 1 | 1.2B USD | 100 | 60 | |
| 5 | 3.1B CNY (≈$440M) | 99 | 67 | |
| 385 | 1.4B CHF (≈$1.7B) | 47 | 57 | |
| 392 | 212.0B JPY (≈$1.4B) | 46 | 41 | |
| 392 | 44.2B JPY (≈$300M) | 46 | 53 | |
| 392 | 314.6B JPY (≈$2.1B) | 46 | 75 | |
| 392 | 12.1B USD | 46 | 43 | |
| 392 | 676M SGD (≈$514M) | 46 | 43 | |
| 392 | 263M CHF (≈$302M) | 46 | 39 | |
| 392 | 48.0B USD | 46 | 44 | |
| 399 | 1.2B SAR (≈$330M) | 45 | 53 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score