The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. Price has moved down 2.1% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it C, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading bullish. Over the past year the shares are down 23%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (14 analysts) rates it hold, with a mean price target of $51.
Alexandria Real Estate Equities ARE
Outside both standards
An entry written while the outcome is still unknown. It will be scored by what the market does next, and it will never be edited to look cleverer than it was.
In plain words · Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.
read at $50.22
Alexandria Real Estate Equities holds its Markup at $50.22.
- PHPhase · the trend structure carries the Markup label
- INInsiders · no filings inside 60 days, left as found
- POPositioning · no disclosures inside 60 days, left as found
- OPOptions · no verdict drawn today, left as found
- SCScreen · does not pass the values gate
- edge confirmed
- edge broken
- edge forming
Each arm is one independent read. Conviction is not a single call, it is how many edges converge.
The investor read · the season, not the day
| Phase | Markup |
| Quantitative state | Consolidating, no directional conviction, held for 19 days |
| Price | $50.22 |
| Valuation | N/A trailing · -57.07 forward price to earnings |
| Values screen | FAIL · score 10.0 |
| Beta | 1.18 |
The opportunity · what the numbers say it is worth
Our framework reads AVOID — it trades at roughly a 4% discount to our $52.00 fair value, weak competitive moat.
Price history & projections · where it has been, where the models see it going
The valuation journey · where the price sits against fair value and the Street
Green marks levels above today's price, red below; the shaded band is the gap between the price and our fair value.
Reading the gap · Our model sees value the Street hasn't fully caught up to yet.
| Revenue growth | -11.50% |
| Profit margin | -36.14% |
| Debt to equity | 66.51 |
| Analyst consensus | Hold · 14 covering |
Fair value and rating are our own model estimates; target range reflects third-party analyst estimates. Analysis, not advice.
The values screen, explained · five checks, plain English
This company is excluded by both standards. There are two widely recognised ways to check whether a company is suitable for a Muslim investor. It fails on both:
Used by most halal investing apps ✗ DOES NOT PASS
The one Titan applies ✗ DOES NOT PASS
Why it fails. The problem is its debt ratio. Because both standards agree on this, it is a clear exclusion, not a borderline case.
What these two standards are, and how they differ →
- Business activity Its core business isn't built on prohibited lines — no gambling, alcohol, tobacco, weapons, or interest-based lending. Pass
- Debt load Interest-bearing debt is 37.4% of its assets, above the one-third ceiling the screen allows. Fail
- Interest-bearing cash Cash held in interest-bearing accounts and securities is 4.5% of assets, under the one-third limit. Pass
- Receivables Money owed to the company is 1.6% of assets, under the 49% limit. Pass
- Revenue purity Only 0.0% of revenue comes from non-compliant sources — under the 5% line. Pass
Every security is read against two recognised standards: our stricter asset-based screen (ratios measured against total assets) and the more widely used market-value standard (measured against market capitalisation). Where they agree we say so plainly; where they part ways — almost always on the debt check — we show both readings and mark it, because that disagreement is the finding, not a fault. We report the score; you and your scholar make the call.
The business, in plain words · what the numbers mean
Life science landlord posts deepening losses
Picture a landlord whose lab buildings should be in demand yet still reports shrinking revenue and negative profits. We pass on this name because the core numbers point to a business losing ground fast in a sector that demands strength.
Forward earnings sit at a negative fifty seven times multiple with revenue down twelve percent and profit margins at negative thirty six percent. Return on equity has turned negative four percent while the ethical screen flags excessive debt and the moat looks weak.
Fourteen analysts sit on a hold rating with a median target only slightly above the current price yet the combination of leverage and negative returns leaves little room for error if rates stay high. Analysis, not advice.
| Forward P/E | -57.1x |
| Revenue growth | -11.5% revenue is shrinking |
| Profit margin | -36.1% currently unprofitable |
| Return on equity | -4.1% not currently earning a positive return on equity |
| Debt to equity | 0.67 moderate, manageable leverage |
| Current ratio | 0.80 below 1 — short-term bills exceed liquid assets |
| Beta | 1.18 moves a little more than the market |
| Market cap | $8.8B |
| Employees | 514 |
The risks · The main risks here are ordinary market swings and the chance our fair-value read proves too optimistic.
Plain-English interpretation of our own screen data. Analysis, not advice.
Related securities · others in ARE's space worth a look
Screened names in the same industry · explore each on its own page.
Where & how to trade · wherever in the world you are
ARE trades on a US exchange. As a US-listed security it is accessible through almost any international broker offering US markets. New to this, or investing from outside the US? Our guide to accessing global markets covers brokers, currencies and the practical steps.
The trader read · the latest dated commentary
The dated journal · newest first, never edited
The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. Price has moved down 0.0% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it C, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading bullish. Over the past year the shares are down 23%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (14 analysts) rates it hold, with a mean price target of $51.
The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. Price has moved down 0.0% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it C, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading bullish. Over the past year the shares are down 23%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 13%. The street (14 analysts) rates it hold, with a mean price target of $51.
The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. Price has moved down 0.0% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns.
The framework reads markup. Price is trending higher with momentum. The crowd has caught on and buyers are in control. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows negative risk-adjusted returns.
Each entry above was written on its date, before the outcome. A journal you can prune is not a journal.
The insider ledger · Form 4 filings, as filed
| Date | Insider | Title | Type | Shares | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-06 | MARCUS JOEL S | Officer and Director | 7,500 | $347,558 | |
| 2026-05-05 | MARCUS JOEL S | Officer and Director | 7,500 | $320,416 | |
| 2026-05-04 | MARCUS JOEL S | Officer and Director | 10,000 | $410,200 | |
| 2026-04-17 | KUHN HALLIE E. | Officer | 536 | $25,835 | |
| 2026-04-15 | MCGRATH SHEILA K. | Director | 129 | · | |
| 2026-04-15 | KLEIN RICHARD HUNTER | Director | 112 | · | |
| 2026-04-15 | WORONOFF MICHAEL A | Director | 407 | · | |
| 2026-04-15 | HASH STEVE | Director | 343 | · | |
| 2026-04-15 | CAIN JAMES P | Director | 145 | · | |
| 2026-03-31 | LEE ORRAPARN C. | Officer | 21,543 | · |
Public filings, recorded as found. The full tape lives at Insider Intelligence.
The political ledger · congressional disclosures
| Date | Politician | Party | Type | Amount |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 May2026 | Dave McCormick | Republican | buy | 500K–1M |
| 30 Jun2026 | Gil Cisneros | Democrat | buy | 1K–15K |
| 27 May2026 | John Boozman | Republican | sell | 1K–15K |
| 27 May2026 | John Boozman | Republican | sell | 1K–15K |
| 27 May2026 | John Boozman | Republican | sell | 1K–15K |
What holding actually paid · price plus dividends
| Period | Price then | Price return | Divs per share | $1,000 became | Total return |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 month | $46.00 | +14.8% | · | $1,148 | +14.8% |
| 2 months | $42.61 | +23.9% | · | $1,239 | +23.9% |
| 3 months | $49.47 | +6.7% | $0.72 | $1,082 | +8.2% |
| 6 months | $44.21 | +19.4% | $1.44 | $1,227 | +22.7% |
| 1 year | $68.77 | -23.2% | $4.08 | $827 | -17.3% |
| 2 years | $101.67 | -48.1% | $9.32 | $611 | -38.9% |
| 3 years | $103.00 | -48.8% | $14.34 | $652 | -34.8% |
| 5 years | $155.94 | -66.2% | $23.66 | $490 | -51.0% |
Historical returns from market close data. Past performance does not guarantee future results.