vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CoStar Group (CSGP) and Iron Mountain (IRM), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Iron Mountain is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.8B vs $899.9M, roughly 2.0× CoStar Group). CoStar Group runs the higher net margin — 5.2% vs 5.1%, a 0.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, CoStar Group posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (26.9% vs 16.6%). CoStar Group produced more free cash flow last quarter ($101.3M vs $-16.2M). Over the past eight quarters, CoStar Group's revenue compounded faster (17.1% CAGR vs 11.7%).
CoStar Group, Inc. is an American provider of information, analytics, and marketing services to the commercial property industry in North America and Europe. Founded in 1987 by Andrew C. Florance and based in Arlington, Virginia, the company operates the CoStar online database and news website and several online marketplaces, including Apartments.com and Homes.com.
Iron Mountain Inc. is an American enterprise information management services company founded in 1951 and headquartered in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Its records management, information destruction, and data backup and recovery services are supplied to more than 220,000 customers in 58 countries throughout North America, Europe, Latin America, Africa, Asia, and Oceania.
CSGP vs IRM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $899.9M | $1.8B |
| Net Profit | $46.5M | $93.1M |
| Gross Margin | 78.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | 5.5% | 18.5% |
| Net Margin | 5.2% | 5.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 26.9% | 16.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | -22.2% | -11.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.12 | $0.31 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $899.9M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $833.6M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $781.3M | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $732.2M | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $709.4M | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $692.6M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $677.8M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $656.4M | $1.5B |
| Q4 25 | $46.5M | $93.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-30.9M | $86.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.2M | $-43.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-14.8M | $16.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $59.8M | $105.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $53.0M | $-33.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.2M | $34.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.7M | $77.0M |
| Q4 25 | 78.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 79.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 78.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 79.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 80.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 79.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 80.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 78.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 5.5% | 18.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -6.1% | 17.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | 15.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -5.8% | 16.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.6% | 17.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.4% | 16.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.4% | 15.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -6.5% | 16.6% |
| Q4 25 | 5.2% | 5.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | -3.7% | 4.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | -2.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.0% | 1.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.4% | 6.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.7% | -2.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.8% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.0% | 5.2% |
| Q4 25 | $0.12 | $0.31 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.07 | $0.28 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.01 | $-0.15 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.04 | $0.05 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.14 | $0.35 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.13 | $-0.11 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.05 | $0.12 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.02 | $0.25 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.6B | $158.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $140.0M | $16.2B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $8.3B | $-981.0M |
| Total Assets | $10.5B | $21.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.02× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | $158.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.6B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.7B | $155.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $140.0M | $16.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $15.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0B | $14.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $14.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.0B | $13.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | $13.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0B | $12.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.0B | $12.6B |
| Q4 25 | $8.3B | $-981.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.6B | $-882.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.6B | $-767.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $8.6B | $-698.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.6B | $-503.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.5B | $-259.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.4B | $-132.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.3B | $18.5M |
| Q4 25 | $10.5B | $21.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.8B | $20.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.5B | $20.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.4B | $19.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.3B | $18.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.1B | $18.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.1B | $18.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.0B | $17.8B |
| Q4 25 | 0.02× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.12× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.12× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.12× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.13× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.13× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.14× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.14× | 679.18× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $162.1M | $500.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $101.3M | $-16.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 11.3% | -0.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 6.8% | 28.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 3.49× | 5.37× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $123.0M | $-931.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $162.1M | $500.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $68.2M | $267.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $146.5M | $375.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $53.2M | $197.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $94.6M | $431.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $100.3M | $252.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.1M | $382.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $139.6M | $130.0M |
| Q4 25 | $101.3M | $-16.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-5.5M | $-256.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $27.7M | $-181.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-500.0K | $-477.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $25.2M | $-186.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $40.2M | $-143.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-14.7M | $-14.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-237.1M | $-251.1M |
| Q4 25 | 11.3% | -0.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -0.7% | -14.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.5% | -10.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.1% | -30.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.6% | -11.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.8% | -9.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.2% | -1.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -36.1% | -17.0% |
| Q4 25 | 6.8% | 28.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.8% | 29.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.2% | 32.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.3% | 42.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.8% | 39.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.7% | 25.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.7% | 25.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 57.4% | 25.8% |
| Q4 25 | 3.49× | 5.37× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.10× | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.63× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 12.15× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.58× | 4.08× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.03× | 11.04× | ||
| Q1 24 | 20.84× | 1.69× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CSGP
| Co Star | $503.8M | 56% |
| Other | $283.0M | 31% |
| Loop Net | $94.7M | 11% |
IRM
| Storage Rental | $1.1B | 58% |
| Services | $781.9M | 42% |
