Why U.S. Self-Storage Operators Are Struggling to Secure Financing (and What It Means)

Jul 14, 2025
18 min read

Introduction

U.S. self-storage operators have hit a financing wall in the past 18 months. A confluence of macroeconomic shifts and changing lender attitudes has made it harder than ever to get projects funded. Yet amid the crunch, a silver lining is emerging for opportunistic investors. Below we break down the causes of the credit squeeze, its impact on development pipelines and regional markets, and why this challenging moment could be a countercyclical opportunity for savvy players.

A Tougher Lending Climate: Rates Up, Credit Tightens

Rising interest rates and economic uncertainty are at the root of today’s financing strain. After the pandemic-era boom of cheap money and surging demand, the Federal Reserve flipped the script in 2022–2023 by raising rates at the fastest pace in decades. The Fed hiked its benchmark rate 11 times from March 2022 to July 2023 – lifting borrowing costs to the highest level in 22 years. This inflation-fighting campaign sent ripple effects through capital markets: debt became far more expensive, and many banks and lenders pulled back on new loans.

By early 2024, the cost of debt was “substantially higher” than just a year prior. Commercial real estate lenders turned more selective, more conservative, more expensive – or stopped lending altogether. Self-storage was no exception. Even though many lenders still view self-storage as a desirable asset class compared to troubled sectors like office, higher interest rates have made deals harder to pencil out. Debt service payments on new loans doubled in some cases as benchmark rates (like SOFR) jumped from near-zero to ~5%. For self-storage developers with floating-rate construction loans, interest costs soared into the high single digits (approaching double digits after lender spreads). This has eroded project feasibility and forced a “gut check” on property valuations – buyers now demand higher cap rates (lower prices) to compensate for costly capital.

Crucially, U.S. banks – historically the primary source of self-storage debt – became skittish. A few regional bank failures in 2023 and broader regulatory pressures led many banks to shrink their commercial real estate loan books. Payoffs of old loans slowed (as transaction volume fell), so banks had fewer freed-up funds for new deals. With balance sheets under stress, banks limited new lending mainly to existing customers or those willing to bring large deposit relationships. Many regional banks stopped construction lending entirely or now demand stricter terms (e.g. personal guarantees, recourse provisions). The data tells the story: in early 2023, banks made over 90% of self-storage loans; by Q2 2023 their share plummeted to 37%, with non-bank lenders stepping in to fill the gap. In short, traditional credit tightened dramatically.

Lenders Get Conservative: Underwriting and Risk Perceptions Shift

As banks retreated, underwriting standards stiffened across the board. Whether the lender is a bank, life insurer, or private debt fund, they are all scrutinizing self-storage deals more heavily in today’s environment. Several notable shifts have emerged:

Lower Leverage, Higher Equity: Lenders are cutting back how much they’ll lend relative to property value. In the low-rate era, loans could reach ~75% loan-to-value (LTV). Now, with higher rates, debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) constraints kick in long before LTV maximums. To meet a typical minimum 1.25× DSCR at today’s rates, loans often size to just 50–65% LTV, meaning borrowers must inject 35–50% equity to close a deal. In many cases, a 1.25× DSCR produces a new loan smaller than the balance on the old loan – a major refinancing challenge for owners who bought or built with high leverage and haven’t grown net operating income (NOI) enough.
Tougher NOI and Demand Assumptions: Lenders have become more pessimistic in pro forma underwriting. Self-storage fundamentals cooled off in 2023 – occupancies dipped a few points and street rental rates fell ~10% nationally after peaking during COVID. With softer rent growth and occupancy forecasts, projected revenues are lower, which further tightens the credit calculus. Underwriters are also factoring in surging operating costs (insurance, property taxes, labor) that eat into NOI. All this reduces the debt a property’s cash flow can support. As one industry advisor noted, “with higher interest rates and construction costs, increased competition and softening demand, there’s significantly less room for error when underwriting a self-storage development”.
Greater Credit Enhancements: Lender risk appetite is lower today. Banks that are still active often require recourse (personal guarantees from borrowers) or cash flow sweeps and other covenants to safeguard against downside. Loan structures have become more conservative “relative to a few years ago” with more onerous terms. Essentially, lenders are demanding more buffers – whether in the form of borrower guarantees, faster amortization, or extra reserves – to offset perceived risk.
Who Will Lend? With banks on the sidelines, borrowers must turn to alternative capital sources. Debt funds, mortgage REITs, insurance companies, and even large self-storage operators themselves are stepping in. For example, private lenders and debt funds dramatically increased their volume of self-storage loans through 2023–24 to fill the void. Major self-storage REITs have also launched bridge loan programs or joint venture debt vehicles to finance projects that banks won’t. These alternatives bring flexibility (faster closing, creative structuring) but often at a higher cost of capital. Life insurance companies, in particular, have become the most accessible lenders in the space lately, given their long-term outlook and relative stability. By contrast, CMBS financing is volatile and cumbersome (with less borrower flexibility), and many credit unions and debt funds are cautious, behaving “hit or miss” much like banks in this cycle.

In summary, lenders’ risk perception of self-storage has shifted from bullish to cautious. During 2020–2021, record occupancy gains and NOI growth whetted lenders’ appetite – they competed to make loans at 3–4% rates. Now, faced with an uncertain economy and normalization of self-storage performance, lenders are back to fundamentals: requiring stronger balance sheets and deals that work even under conservative assumptions. As one capital markets VP observed, “Despite industry headwinds and capital markets volatility, many types of lenders are still pursuing self-storage deals – but with tighter scrutiny”. Borrowers should expect more hoops to jump through (and more cash in the deal) to secure financing in 2025.

Development Pipeline Hits the Brakes

One immediate casualty of tighter financing is the new development pipeline. When cheap capital flowed freely, self-storage construction boomed – hitting a record $6.9 billion in U.S. construction spending in 2023. But that momentum is reversing fast. Developers are pausing or canceling projects en masse as lending dries up and project economics weaken.

Consider these indicators of a slowdown in supply:

Planned Projects on Hold: Some industry experts estimate that 70% to 90% of planned self-storage projects have been paused or canceled due to the spike in interest rates. Higher borrowing costs alone have rendered many once-feasible projects unviable. Deals that “penciled out” at 4% interest and $40 per sq. ft. construction costs no longer make sense at today’s rates and prices. As one developer put it, “those days are in the past.” Rising rates have essentially killed the economics of a huge swath of marginal projects.
Surge in Cancellations/Abandonments: Data backs this up. In 2023, 245 planned storage developments were outright canceled. Deferred projects jumped 44.5% year-over-year, and the number of totally abandoned projects doubled (+104% vs. 2022). This clear spike in stalled projects in the latter half of 2023 signals that many investors lost confidence in projects’ viability. Falling rental rates were a big factor – as street rents declined, some developments no longer penciled, leading investors to pull the plug.
Fewer Construction Starts: New groundbreakings are slowing sharply. Full-year 2024 construction starts are projected to be 20% lower than in 2023. And after the current wave of projects finishes, the forward pipeline looks very thin. By one estimate, the under-construction pipeline shrank ~7% year-over-year by late 2024, after peaking in December 2023. Looking further out, total new supply in planning is decelerating – the pipeline was essentially flat through most of 2024 after rapid growth in prior years. Long-range forecasts predict annual new supply additions will fall to just ~2% of existing inventory by 2027 (and only ~1.5% by 2030). In other words, supply growth could crawl at its slowest pace in over a decade in the coming years.
Fewer Completions Ahead: The boom of 2022–23 is giving way to a construction cliff. Industry analysts raised near-term delivery forecasts slightly (expecting ~54.5 million square feet to open in 2024, and 47.9 million in 2025) as builders rush to finish projects initiated during the boom. However, beyond those, projections drop off steeply: annual completions are expected to fall to ~29 million sq. ft. by 2028–2029, roughly half the recent pace. This reflects both caution by developers and the reality that getting construction loans is very difficult right now. Marc Boorstein, a self-storage advisor whose firm works with 30 developers, noted that while each client “typically would have several projects in the works, many are down to a single project if any at all”. The reason is straightforward: “The construction lending environment is so difficult… It is really slowing down new activity.”

Two intertwined factors are driving this development chill: a challenging lending market and softer project fundamentals. On the financing side, Boorstein observes that “major lenders are generally skittish on commercial real estate loans,” so smaller regional banks have tried to pick up some slack. But even regional lenders are scrutinizing deals more than ever and charging higher rates, causing many developers to hit “pause” until conditions improve. On the fundamentals side, rental incomes have plateaued, undermining pro formas. “There wasn’t a big pop in rental activity last spring/summer,” Boorstein says, and “move-in rates are lower than they were last year.” Lenders see these flat rents and grow wary of underwriting new projects that might lease up slowly or at rates insufficient to cover debt. Aggressive pricing tactics by the REITs – e.g. steep move-in discounts offered by the industry’s largest operator after a major merger – have further suppressed effective rents in many markets. All of this makes it difficult for new projects to get funded.

The upshot: the U.S. self-storage supply pipeline is tapping the brakes hard. After years of rapid expansion, the combination of expensive capital and tepid rent growth is enforcing discipline. Development “has waned” from its post-pandemic boom, as noted by Yardi Matrix and others. Even projects that do move forward are taking longer – the average time under construction stretched to 413 days for projects completing in late 2024, and planning phases are longer too as developers carefully line up entitlements, equity partners, and high-cost debt. For existing self-storage owners, this construction slowdown “is a real positive” – it limits new competition and should help occupancies and rents. But for developers, the message is clear: only the best, most “bulletproof” projects are getting financed and built in the current climate.

Regional Divergences: Where is the Financing Squeeze Felt Most?

While the lending pullback is nationwide, its effects vary by region and market conditions. Lenders today are hyper-aware of local self-storage supply/demand dynamics. In markets deemed oversaturated or economically shaky, securing financing is even more challenging; conversely, markets with strong fundamentals stand a better chance of attracting capital (albeit on tighter terms than before).

Some regional trends and examples include:

Oversupplied Sunbelt Markets – Higher Caution: Many high-growth Sunbelt metros (Texas, the Southeast) saw a flood of new storage construction in recent years, leading to above-average supply per capita. Lenders have become especially wary of financing new projects in cities like Denver, Austin, Atlanta and parts of the Southwest, where supply gluts have pushed rents down. For instance, Denver and Austin each experienced 8–13% annual rent declines recently due to oversupply. In such markets with 10–12+ square feet of storage per capita already, lenders perceive heightened risk – any new facility may struggle to lease up. Smaller regional banks in these areas have largely tightened the purse strings for ground-up construction, often telling developers to wait until occupancy absorbs existing units. Even refinancing an older facility in a saturated market can be tough: appraisals are coming in lower as income softens, and banks are sizing loans conservatively to current cash flow.
Coastal and Gateway Strength: On the flip side, coastal gateway cities and dense urban markets continue to show resilient performance, which bolsters lender confidence. Markets like New York, Washington D.C., Los Angeles, and Chicago have less storage space per capita and have maintained higher rents (often $2+ per sq. ft.). For example, D.C. saw 12%+ YoY rent growth recently and Chicago over 14%, supported by relatively low supply ratios. In these constrained markets, well-located Class A facilities are still financeable, especially by life insurers and national lenders eager to deploy funds in top-tier locations. Lenders prioritize deals in markets where occupancy remains high and rent trends are flat or rising. That said, even in these markets the terms are stricter than before – a New York or L.A. project might get done at, say, 55% leverage and a hefty interest rate spread, whereas two years ago it might have secured 65–70% leverage at a lower rate.
Regional Banks vs. National Capital: The regional dimension of lender behavior is notable. In some secondary markets, local banks are still lending (albeit cautiously) because they know the sponsors and the area. However, many such banks now require that developers bring deposits or extra guarantees, or they limit loans to existing clients. In contrast, national lenders (debt funds, insurance companies) will cherry-pick only the strongest deals in any market. Thus, a borrower in a smaller city might actually fare better tapping an out-of-region lender with a mandate to grow in self-storage, than relying on a hometown bank that’s over-exposed to local real estate. We see this in tertiary markets where a niche storage project got financed by a specialized debt fund or even a self-storage REIT’s bridge program, whereas local banks passed on it. The common thread is that no matter the region, lenders are demanding more cushion. As JLL’s capital markets team noted, banks that are slowly returning are showing a “heightened focus on increased loan structure and credit enhancements” to mitigate risk.

In essence, geography matters, but mainly as a proxy for risk factors like supply saturation and economic health. Every market is feeling the crunch of tighter credit, but those that experienced the greatest self-storage building sprees or demand slowdowns are feeling it acutely. Markets with an imbalance (too much new space and not enough move-ins) have the dual problem of declining performance and spooked lenders. Meanwhile, healthier markets offer a relative safe haven, but even there borrowers must bring strong deals to the table to secure funds.

Countercyclical Opportunity: Time to Lean In?

Paradoxically, what makes life difficult for operators today may create an attractive opening for contrarian investors. History shows that in real estate, the best deals are often made when capital is scarce and others are retrenching. The self-storage sector in 2024–2025 appears to be at just such a moment of dislocation. Here’s why some see this as a countercyclical investment opportunity:

Limited New Supply for Years: As outlined, new construction is grinding to a halt. By 2025 and beyond, far fewer facilities will be coming online – the pipeline is projected to shrink to nearly negligible levels relative to existing stock. For investors, this means less future competition. If you acquire or develop now (with a strong project), there’s a good chance your asset will “be the only new supply in the market” when it opens. In the mid-term, muted supply growth can drive outsized occupancy and rent gains for existing facilities once demand picks up again. Some aggressive developers advocate “the best time to get a project in the pipeline is when everyone else is on the sidelines”. By moving forward now – even though capital is expensive – you could deliver into a market starved for space, achieving faster lease-up and pricing power.
Valuation Reset = Buying at a Discount: The self-storage sector has undergone a healthy correction after the frothy highs of 2021. Property values fell roughly 20% from their peak by 2023, and cap rates expanded ~100 basis points (from ~4.5% to ~5.5% for Class A). This repricing, combined with some distressed sales (owners who must refinance or sell), is creating opportunities to buy quality assets at more reasonable prices. In 2024, investors still managed to transact about $3 billion in self-storage facility sales – over 800 properties – often at a relative discount to prior years. Notably, cap rates held fairly flat even as interest rates rose, indicating buyers expect long-term stability and were willing to step in at adjusted pricing. “Smart capital” is quietly accumulating assets now, before broader market optimism returns. For institutional investors, today’s lack of aggressive buyers (and higher financing costs scaring some away) can be a time to negotiate favorable deals on strong properties.
Resilient Cash Flows in a Storm: Self-storage has once again proven its relative resilience in a downturn. Even with a modest pullback, occupancies have only dipped to ~90% on average (down from 95%+ peaks), and operators maintained cash flow by using promotions to keep tenants. In contrast to offices or retail centers dealing with severe demand shifts, people still need storage through life transitions. During 2023’s slowdown, storage properties “maintained consistent cash flows despite rising interest rates and inflation,” and many REITs saw only slight NOI declines. This solid performance under stress reinforces lenders’ and investors’ view of storage as a “safe haven” asset class. Thus, the sector is likely to recover faster when the economy stabilizes – meaning investments made at today’s low point could ride a strong upward cycle in the next 2–3 years.
Macro Winds Turning Favorable: Looking ahead, there are credible signs that the worst of the financing squeeze may ease. The Fed has signaled it’s likely done with rate hikes, and markets anticipate possible rate cuts in late 2024 into 2025 if inflation continues to cool. Already by early 2025, interest rates had plateaued and the mere expectation of easing rates improved investor sentiment in storage. At the same time, consumer confidence and mobility are expected to rebound: home sales in 2024 hit multi-decade lows due to mortgage rate lock-in, but pent-up housing demand is building. As mortgage rates inch down, more people will move, and with moving drives storage usage (roughly 50% of storage demand comes from household moves), storage rentals could surge. Industry forecasts (e.g. Argus Self Storage Advisors) predict that improving housing activity and consumer sentiment will boost storage occupancy by 200–400 basis points by end of 2025. In short, fundamentals may strengthen markedly over the next 3 years. Investors who enter or expand now could benefit from both cap rate compression (if debt costs fall) and income growth (as occupancy and rents rise).
Less Competition for Deals: With many would-be buyers and developers on the sidelines (either unable or unwilling to transact), those who do have capital and conviction face less competition. This can be an ideal time to negotiate land deals, lock in contractor pricing (construction costs have stopped spiking, and builders are seeking work), and structure favorable terms with lenders eager to deploy money into safe projects. As one development exec advised, “assuming you have a project with good economics, don’t wait… By the time your facility is online, it’ll likely be the only new supply around.” The implication is that first movers now could achieve outsized market share in the coming upcycle.

Of course, executing a strategy in this environment requires navigating the new realities – higher equity requirements, creative financing (perhaps using alternative lenders or joint ventures), and careful market selection. But the strategic rationale for leaning in is compelling. Self-storage’s long-term demand drivers (life transitions, population growth, small-business storage needs) remain intact, and the current slump appears to be a cyclical dip rather than a structural decline. Investors with dry powder and patience can position themselves to ride the next growth wave, potentially realizing strong returns when capital markets normalize.

How Self-Storage Stacks Up to Other Industrial Real Estate

Segments

Self-storage is often lumped into “industrial” real estate alongside warehouses, distribution centers, and specialized facilities like cold storage. How does the current capital access and performance of self-storage compare to these other segments? In broad strokes, many of the same macro pressures apply across industrial assets, but there are important nuances:

Warehousing/Logistics: The warehouse sector was the darling of commercial real estate during the e-commerce boom. Even now, fundamentals are relatively robust – vacancies nationally are about 5–7% (up from record lows around 4% in 2021), and rents, while softening, are holding near all-time highs in most markets. However, the financing environment for industrial developers has tightened similarly. A flood of new big-box supply in 2022–2023 overshot demand; 2023 saw 486 million sq. ft. of new industrial space delivered versus only 94 million sq. ft. absorbed. This oversupply and higher debt costs caused developers and lenders to tap the brakes. In fact, “the rising cost of debt and equity [has] made new construction, especially speculative projects, difficult to execute” in the industrial realm. Lenders are still keen on prime logistics projects (particularly those pre-leased to strong tenants), but speculative warehouse development has slowed significantly – much like self-storage – because higher interest rates mean higher break-even rents that many markets can’t yet support. One difference is scale and sponsorship: industrial megaprojects often have backing from large institutional investors or REITs (e.g. Prologis), which may finance with corporate bonds or equity, partially sidestepping bank lending. In contrast, many self-storage developments are mid-sized projects reliant on construction loans. Still, from a capital access standpoint, both sectors have seen banks retreat; life insurers and debt funds have become crucial sources for well-leased industrial assets just as they have for storage. Performance-wise, industrial enjoyed double-digit rent growth through 2022 and is now normalizing, whereas self-storage had an even sharper COVID spike followed by a modest rent decline. Both sectors are expected to stabilize and grow again as the economy steadies – with industrial demand tied to business inventory and e-commerce trends, and storage demand tied to housing mobility and small business formation.
Light Industrial/Flex Space: Light industrial properties (small warehouses, flex spaces for SMEs) often rely on local and regional banks for financing, similar to self-storage. These assets typically have shorter leases and more diverse tenant pools (like self-storage’s many individual renters). Lenders have grown cautious here too, but because many light-industrial deals are smaller, local lenders or credit unions might still entertain them if the borrower relationship is strong. In terms of performance, light industrial has been strong due to tight supply in many infill locations – vacancy rates are low and rents steady. Unlike self-storage, which had a very visible post-COVID boom/bust cycle in street rates, light industrial rent growth has been more linear. Capital access for stabilized light industrial is still quite good (life companies and even some banks like the stability of multi-tenant industrial in good markets), but new speculative projects face the same headwinds of higher costs. A key difference is that building conversion or adaptive reuse can come into play: some older light industrial or flex buildings are being repurposed (or vice versa), whereas self-storage is more unique in use. Overall, relative to self-storage, light industrial is equally subject to interest rate impacts, but possibly a hair more favored by conservative lenders because of longer lease terms (storage leases are month-to-month, which some traditional lenders view as higher-risk even if historically it’s stable).
Cold Storage: Cold storage warehouses (refrigerated distribution centers) are a niche segment that has attracted increasing interest due to surging demand for frozen food logistics and pharmaceuticals. From a performance standpoint, cold storage is booming: vacancies are extremely low (around 4% nationally) and rents are high. In fact, the cold storage market is so undersupplied that development is still near record levels – about 9.4 million sq. ft. in the pipeline as of early 2024, which is remarkable given high interest rates. However, that still represents only ~2.2% of total industrial construction, as cold storage remains a small specialty within the broader sector. Capital access for cold storage can be challenging: these facilities cost twice as much per square foot to build as dry warehouses and are highly specialized. Lenders typically require pre-leases or strong covenants; speculative cold storage projects are rare due to risk (limited tenant pool, custom build-outs). Yet, institutional capital has been eager to invest in cold storage via joint ventures or specialist REITs, viewing it as a growth sector. MetLife’s investment arm notes that cold storage is “institutionalizing,” which has compressed cap rates (in some cases even lower than standard industrial). In the current climate, financing a cold storage project likely demands a hybrid approach – perhaps a lower-leverage construction loan from a bank plus mezzanine debt or equity from an investor who wants a foothold in this high-demand arena. Compared to self-storage, cold storage deals might find it slightly easier to justify high rents (because user demand is so strong), but the club of lenders who understand and finance cold storage is relatively small. Both sectors share the trait of being alternatives that proved resilient in COVID and have good long-term demand, but cold storage’s barrier to entry is higher due to cost and complexity.

In summary, self-storage and its industrial cousins are all navigating a high-rate, risk-averse capital market. Warehousing and general industrial benefited from being “core” assets – there is a flood of institutional equity that can step in even if loans are pricey. Self-storage, historically considered more “alternative,” actually showed itself to be equally resilient and has seen new lenders (debt funds, etc.) embrace it as other property types floundered. Notably, self-storage development tends to target higher internal return on cost than typical warehouse projects. This means self-storage deals inherently have a bit more cushion to absorb high interest rates before they break even. As one lender pointed out, “self storage yields a higher return on cost and has the ability to absorb some of the higher cost of capital,” whereas multifamily or industrial builds (with lower yields) struggle much more with today’s rates. This is a key comparative insight: while all sectors are slowed by expensive financing, self-storage’s deal economics can still work in select cases because a well-run facility might target, say, a 8–9% yield on cost, which can clear a 7–8% interest hurdle. A typical new warehouse might underwrite at a 6% yield, which is underwater at those same rates. Hence, lenders and investors are not abandoning self-storage – in fact, many see it as a stable bet in a portfolio, especially vs. troubled sectors like office or retail. The next 3-year horizon will likely see industrial and self-storage both recovering, with constrained new supply bolstering fundamentals. But if capital markets loosen, self-storage could attract a surge of investment given its performance track record and the relative lack of new competition on the way.

In conclusion, U.S. self-storage operators face a trying moment of tighter financing, driven by macroeconomic shifts and lenders’ changing attitudes. Elevated interest rates and cautious banks have squeezed loan proceeds and halted many projects in their tracks. The development pipeline is thinning out, and only the fittest deals are surviving stringent underwriting. Regionally, oversupplied areas feel the most pain, while strong markets still draw funding – at a cost. Yet, this period of constraint is sowing the seeds of the sector’s next upswing. With fewer facilities coming online, existing assets stand to benefit as demand gradually rebounds. And for investors with a contrarian mindset, today’s difficulties may be tomorrow’s gains – a chance to enter or expand in a resilient asset class while others retreat. In the words of one industry veteran, “Scrutiny is required” now, but those who do their homework and commit capital in this environment could be rewarded when the clouds part. The self-storage financing landscape is certainly in transition, but as 2025 unfolds, it may well prove to be a crossroads of opportunity rather than just a roadblock.

Sources:

Agota Felhazi, Multi-Housing News – The Changing Shape of Self Storage Lending, Jan. 2025.
Andy Bratt (Gantry) interview, Multi-Housing News, Oct. 2023 – Can Self Storage Borrowers Make a Deal?.
Inside Self-Storage (Derek Walker), Jan. 2024 – What’s Happening to Self-Storage Development in 2024?.
Alexander Harris, Storable Blog, Mar. 2024 – Self-Storage Development Hits Pause After Record Year.
Modern Storage Media, Apr. 2024 – The New Financing Landscape: Navigating Lending in 2024.
List Self Storage Insights, Jul. 2025 – Self-Storage in Transition: Market Recalibration and Resilience.
Nina Dale, CRE Daily, Mar. 2025 – Self-Storage Projects Could Slow Down to 2% by 2027.
Signal Ventures, Jun. 2025 – Why Self-Storage Is Poised for a Strategic Comeback in 2025.
NAIOP Industrial Space Demand Forecast, Mar. 2024.
Newmark Cold Storage Outlook 2024 (via AFIRE).