Which is better, AMH or CUBE?

On the Buffett-Fit framework, CubeSmart (CUBE) currently grades higher than AMH — 55/100 (D grade) vs 55/100 (D). That said, "better" depends on which framework you trust — AMH wins on Philip Fisher; CUBE wins on Benjamin Graham, Peter Lynch, Charlie Munger, and Terry Smith. The full pillar breakdown is on this page.

Should I buy AMH or CUBE?

This page is an educational comparison, not investment advice. Both AMH and CUBE are graded against the same Buffett 5-pillar framework (moat, earnings durability, management quality, financial health, valuation) plus six other documented investor frameworks. Read the side-by-side breakdown to see which one matches the criteria you care about most — and always do your own research before making any investment decision.

Is AMH better than CUBE for value investing?

The two are close on the headline Buffett-Fit score (55/100 vs 55/100), so "better for value investing" depends on which pillar you weight most. The five Buffett pillars + six other frameworks are broken down side-by-side on this page so you can pick the one that fits your style.

What's the difference between AMH and CUBE on Warren Buffett's framework?

Both stocks are evaluated on the same five pillars: economic moat (durable competitive advantage), earnings durability (consistent profitability), management quality (capital allocation), financial health (conservative balance sheet), and valuation (margin of safety). AMH currently scores 55/100 (D grade); CUBE scores 55/100 (D grade). The "Where each wins" section on this page breaks down which pillar each stock dominates.

Which has the stronger moat, AMH or CUBE?

Moat strength is one of the five pillars in the Buffett-Fit score on this page. AMH and CUBE are each scored on ROIC sustainability, gross-margin durability, and qualitative signals like brand strength, switching costs, network effects, and regulatory barriers. The pillar breakdown on this page shows the moat sub-score side-by-side so you can see which one has the more durable competitive advantage.

Which is more undervalued, AMH or CUBE?

Valuation is one of the five Buffett-Fit pillars on this page. Both stocks are scored on owner-earnings yield, price-to-intrinsic-value vs the underlying compounding rate, and the margin of safety relative to a conservative DCF. The valuation sub-score in the table below tells you which one currently trades at a more attractive price relative to its underlying business quality.

Are AMH and CUBE both Real Estate stocks?

Yes — both American Homes 4 Rent (AMH) and CubeSmart (CUBE) operate in the Real Estate sector. That makes this a direct sector-peer comparison, which is the apples-to-apples way to use the Buffett-Fit framework: the score weighs each stock against its sector's specific quality and valuation benchmarks (sector-relative bonus), so the cross-stock comparison isn't distorted by inter-sector base-rate differences.

Is this AMH vs CUBE comparison investment advice?

No. This page is an educational pattern-match against documented public frameworks (Buffett, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Greenblatt, Munger, Smith), not personalised investment advice. The scores reflect how closely each stock matches each framework's documented criteria — they are not buy/hold/sell recommendations. Always do your own research and consult a licensed financial adviser for personalised advice.

Stock comparison

American Homes 4 Rent

CubeSmart

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

AMH

Market cap

$11.72B

Sector

Real Estate

CUBE

CubeSmart

Market cap

$9.12B

Sector

Real Estate

Overall winner

CubeSmart CUBE

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Fit scores by strategy

Strategy	AMH	CUBE	Winner
Warren Buffett	55D	55D	Tie
Benjamin Graham	44D	66B	CUBE
Philip Fisher	60C	49D	AMH
Peter Lynch	52C	64C	CUBE
Joel Greenblatt	46D	46D	Tie
Charlie Munger	49D	53D	CUBE
Terry Smith	47D	49D	CUBE

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	AMH	CUBE
Market cap	$11.72B	$9.12B
P/E (TTM)	23.7x	28.4x
EV/EBIT	35.8x	28.5x
ROIC (TTM)	3.65%	7.2%
Gross margin	30.2%	11.86%
Net margin	25.19%	28.93%
Revenue CAGR 5y	9.38%	8.1%
EPS CAGR 5y	29.47%	7.33%
Debt / Equity	0.7x	1.3x
Dividend yield	4.02%	5.14%

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

AMH leads on

EPS CAGR 5y29.47%vs 7.33%+75%
Gross margin30.2%vs 11.86%+61%
Debt / Equity0.7xvs 1.3x+44%
Market cap$11.72Bvs $9.12B+22%

CUBE leads on

ROIC (TTM)7.2%vs 3.65%+49%
Dividend yield5.14%vs 4.02%+22%
EV/EBIT28.5xvs 35.8x+21%
Net margin28.93%vs 25.19%+13%

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.

American Homes 4 Rent

CubeSmart

Fit scores by strategy

Side-by-side metrics

Where each one wins

More like AMH

More like CUBE

Related on invest-like

Key terms in this analysis