AI
APARTMENT INVESTMENT & MANAGEMENT CO (AIV)·Q1 2020 Earnings Summary
Executive Summary
- Q1 2020 delivered resilient operations despite COVID-19: Same Store NOI up 5.0% YoY, occupancy at 97.6%, and blended lease rates up 3.6%; AFFO per share was $0.60 (midpoint of guidance) and FFO per share $0.67 (+10% YoY) .
- Liquidity strengthened materially: ~$1.0B currently, rising to ~$1.2B with in‑process loans; 2020 capital spending reduced by ~$150M (≈45%) and $688M of new property debt placed at 2.9% WAM rate to lower borrowing costs .
- Balance sheet de‑risking and cash discipline: wrote off $2.9M straight‑line rent receivables and $2.2M deferred broker commissions for vulnerable commercial tenants; shifted those leases to cash accounting .
- Preliminary Q2 indicators: April turnover reached a record low (41.1%), occupancy 96.6% and pricing held with blended lease rate increases of 4.2% YoY; bad debt methodology tightened to recognize ~1% of revenues in April based on credit metrics .
- Strategic narrative catalysts: proactive COVID response, robust same‑store performance, targeted capex cuts, abundant liquidity, and clarifications around Parkmerced mezzanine loan cash collection and risk protections .
What Went Well and What Went Wrong
What Went Well
- Same Store operating momentum: revenue +3.5%, expenses −0.4%, NOI +5.0%; margin strong at 74% and occupancy at 97.6% .
- Pricing power held: weighted‑average rent increases of 3.6% in Q1; April blended rent up 4.2% YoY despite pandemic disruption .
- Liquidity and liability management: ~$1.0B+ liquidity (rising to ~$1.2B), $688M of new property debt placed (8.3‑year WAM, 2.9% rate), lowering overall borrowing costs; no 2020 maturities and reduced 2021‑2024 maturities .
- Quote: “Aimco’s first quarter was solid… AFFO of $0.60 per share… up 9% year‑over‑year… FFO of $0.67 per share… up 10% year‑over‑year.” — CFO Paul Beldin .
What Went Wrong
- GAAP revenue declined YoY on commercial tenant stress and write‑offs: Rental and other property revenues fell to $224.6M from $230.2M; net income per share dropped to $0.04 vs $1.88 prior year largely due to lower gains on dispositions .
- Increased bad debt and commercial collections pressure: April residential collections were 96%; office collected ~90% but other commercial only ~30%—necessitating write‑offs and cash accounting for certain leases .
- COVID‑related costs (~$0.4M) and $5.1M straight‑line rent/deferred commissions charges offset operating outperformance .
- Analyst concerns over Parkmerced cash yield surfaced; management emphasized collectibility protections and subordinated equity cushion .
Financial Results
Segment breakdown (Same Store totals):
KPIs:
Guidance Changes
Earnings Call Themes & Trends
Management Commentary
- “The Aimco business began the year with record effectiveness and record profitability… [but] the last few weeks of March were a time when it seemed that ‘decades’ were happening!” — Terry Considine, CEO .
- “Aimco’s first quarter was solid… AFFO of $0.60 per share… up 9% year‑over‑year… FFO of $0.67 per share… up 10% year‑over‑year.” — Paul Beldin, CFO .
- “Today, Aimco enjoys $1 billion of liquidity… increasing by an additional $200 million… placing $688 million of new property debt… weighted‑average interest rate of 2.9%.” — Paul Beldin .
- “April turnover reached a new low at 41.1%… average daily occupancy was 96.6%… pricing remained solid… blended lease rates up 4.2%.” — Keith Kimmel, EVP Operations .
- “When stabilized, these 5 communities are expected to contribute plus or minus $30 million of additional NOI.” — Wes Powell, EVP Redevelopment .
Q&A Highlights
- Occupancy outlook: Management expects demand to be recovering with week‑over‑week leasing improvements since early April; cautious on precise bottoming but hopeful Q1/April represent trough .
- Dispositions target recalibration: From ~$950M plan to “something under $800M… say $750M” given capex cuts and lease‑up EBITDA contribution; no urgency for sales given liquidity and LTV .
- Parkmerced cash yield debate: Collected ~$0.6M in Q1 cash interest; accrual at 10% continues; management underscored collectibility and $300M junior equity cushioning AIV’s position, plus UCC foreclosure remedies .
- Collections and bad debt: April residential collections 96%; April bad debt ~1% of revenue under tightened FICO‑based methodology; worst pressure in Southern California; prior crisis peak bad debt just over 100bps .
- Pricing strategy: No blanket zero‑increase policy; pricing tailored by property/job cohort; Northern California tech exposure supports rent increases vs hospitality‑impacted assets .
Estimates Context
- S&P Global consensus estimates for Q1 2020 (EPS, revenue, EBITDA) were unavailable at time of analysis due to data access limits; accordingly, we cannot definitively classify Street beats/misses. We anchored performance vs company guidance and prior periods .
Key Takeaways for Investors
- Same Store fundamentals proved durable with 5% NOI growth and solid pricing; short‑term occupancy modestly eased but demand indicators are improving, aided by virtual leasing and targeted resident engagement .
- Liquidity/laddering leave AIV well‑positioned: ~$1.0B–$1.2B liquidity, no 2020 maturities, reduced 2021–2024 maturities, and lower borrowing costs provide flexibility to navigate macro uncertainty .
- Tactical capex cut (~$150M) preserves cash while continuing five long‑cycle projects expected to add ~$30M NOI at stabilization; near‑term deliveries in 2020 could face choppy lease‑ups but long‑term demand remains intact .
- Commercial exposure is small (~3.5% of monthly revenue) but under stress; AIV proactively wrote off vulnerable receivables and shifted to cash recognition, limiting future GAAP volatility from this segment .
- Parkmerced scrutiny is a headline risk; focus on cash collection trajectory and developer progress—but AIV’s structural protections (junior equity cushion, remedies) mitigate downside while preserving optionality .
- Near‑term trading: Favorable operational prints and strong liquidity could support sentiment; watch monthly collections, occupancy, and leasing velocity updates as catalysts.
- Medium‑term thesis: Portfolio quality, disciplined capital recycling, and redevelopment ROI should drive incremental NOI and deleveraging as macro normalizes .