vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Digital Realty (DLR) and Equinix (EQIX), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Equinix is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.4B vs $1.6B, roughly 1.5× Digital Realty). Equinix runs the higher net margin — 6.0% vs 11.0%, a 4.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Digital Realty posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (16.1% vs 8.8%). Over the past eight quarters, Digital Realty's revenue compounded faster (9.8% CAGR vs 5.9%).
Digital Realty is a real estate investment trust that owns, operates and invests in carrier-neutral data centers across the world. The company offers data center, colocation, and interconnection services.
Equinix Inc. is an American multinational company headquartered in Redwood City, California. It specialized in internet connectivity and data center colocation centers, commonly known as carrier hotels until the company converted to a real estate investment trust (REIT) in January 2015.
DLR vs EQIX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 2026 vs Q1 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.6B | $2.4B |
| Net Profit | $98.6M | $265.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | 50.5% |
| Operating Margin | 6.9% | 17.4% |
| Net Margin | 6.0% | 11.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 16.1% | 8.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -10.3% | -22.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.22 | $2.70 |
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.
| Q1 26 | $1.6B | $2.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.5B | $2.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $2.2B |
| Q1 26 | $98.6M | $265.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $98.6M | $265.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $67.8M | $374.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0B | $368.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $110.0M | $343.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $189.6M | $-14.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $51.2M | $297.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $80.2M | $301.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 50.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 50.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 50.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 52.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 51.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 47.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 50.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 49.9% |
| Q1 26 | 6.9% | 17.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | 6.9% | 17.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.8% | 20.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.2% | 21.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.9% | 20.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.1% | 4.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.8% | 19.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.7% | 20.2% |
| Q1 26 | 6.0% | 11.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 6.0% | 11.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.3% | 16.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 69.1% | 16.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.8% | 15.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.2% | -0.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.6% | 13.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.9% | 13.9% |
| Q1 26 | $0.22 | $2.70 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.22 | $2.70 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.15 | $3.81 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.94 | $3.75 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.27 | $3.50 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.50 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.09 | $3.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.20 | $3.16 |
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 | $3.5B | $3.2B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $22.9B | $14.2B |
| Total Assets | $49.4B | $40.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | $3.5B | $3.2B | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.6B | $4.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.3B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.9B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.2B | $3.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.3B | $2.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $17.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $18.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $15.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $15.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $15.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $14.5B |
| Q1 26 | $22.9B | $14.2B | ||
| Q4 25 | $22.9B | $14.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $23.0B | $14.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $22.9B | $14.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.3B | $13.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $21.3B | $13.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $21.2B | $13.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $20.5B | $12.3B |
| Q1 26 | $49.4B | $40.1B | ||
| Q4 25 | $49.4B | $40.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $48.7B | $38.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $48.7B | $38.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $45.1B | $36.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $45.3B | $35.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $45.3B | $35.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $43.6B | $32.9B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.22× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.28× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.14× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.13× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.13× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.18× |
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.
