{"comps":{"land":[],"powered_shell":[]},"hero":{"composite_score":null,"computed_at":"2026-10-27T08:30:41.689716+00:00","constraint_score":49.1,"excess_power":54.0,"iso":"WECC","lat":47.61,"lng":-122.34,"name":"Seattle","queue_wait_months":null,"slug":"seattle","state":"WA","time_to_power_mo":19.3,"time_to_power_months":19.3,"verdict":"CAUTION"},"is_pro":true,"kpis":{"facility_count":160,"headline_basis":"every facility listing DC Hub tracks in this market (operational, under construction, planned and announced; verified and unverified listings included), deduplicated by name + operator across the facilities and discovered_facilities tables. MW is summed over the listings that report capacity (mw_reporting_count of facility_count), so read it as a floor.","lease_rate":null,"mw_reporting_count":14,"operational_mw":450.0,"pipeline_mw":0.0,"queue_months":null,"top_operator":{"facility_count":8,"name":"Sabey"},"total_mw":450.0,"unverified_included":true,"vacancy_pct":null},"live_as_of":{"age_hours":0.1,"iso":"2026-10-27T08:30:41.689716+00:00"},"ma":[],"ok":true,"open_access":"Open to every caller: this is one of the 20 largest US data-center markets by tracked capacity, and its full market briefing (grid, risk, time to power, scores) is free.","operators":[{"facility_count":8,"operator":"Sabey","ranked_by":"facility_count","total_mw":220.0},{"facility_count":5,"operator":"Sabey Data Centers","ranked_by":"facility_count","total_mw":40.0},{"facility_count":5,"operator":"H5 Data Centers","ranked_by":"facility_count","total_mw":36.0},{"facility_count":4,"operator":"Digital Realty","ranked_by":"facility_count","total_mw":14.0},{"facility_count":4,"operator":"DataBank","ranked_by":"facility_count","total_mw":0.0}],"outlook":{"generated_at":"2026-10-25T09:42:12.952788+00:00","narrative_md":"# Seattle Data Center Market Analysis\n\nSeattle's data center footprint spans 160 tracked facilities totaling 450 MW across operational, under-construction, and planned assets, with power availability emerging as the primary constraint on near-term expansion. The market's excess-power rating of 54/100 indicates moderate availability, though this masks an underlying tension: the constraint score of 49/100 signals that grid infrastructure and permitting friction are offsetting nominal capacity. Sabey and H5 Data Centers lead operator concentration, with Sabey holding at least 8 facilities and H5 controlling 5, while Digital Realty maintains a smaller but strategically significant 4-site footprint.\n\nThe DCPI verdict of CAUTION warrants deliberate positioning by acquisition-focused investors. A score pair of 54/49 sits in a precarious middle ground\u2014there is sufficient power narrative to attract capital, yet enough constraint tightness to delay project timelines and compress IRR assumptions. Buyers should model extended permitting cycles and contingency power costs into deal underwriting; the 49/100 constraint rating reflects real friction points that differ materially from markets with clearer infrastructure runways. New entrants should avoid assuming brownfield or pre-leased expansion slots as readily available.\n\nDeal flow into Seattle remains subdued, with no recent tracked transactions despite Sabey's outsized capitalization profile\u2014the firm has absorbed over $500 million in investor backing, yet this has manifested as organic portfolio deepening rather than visible M&A. This pattern mirrors low-deal environments in peer markets like Douglasville, where operator consolidation occurs through internal reinvestment rather than cross-operator acquisition. Sabey's entrenchment as the largest single operator, combined with Digital Realty's presence and H5's regional foothold, has created a relatively stable competitive structure. The absence of acquisition activity suggests either that asking multiples exceed buyer thresholds or that operators view retention and organic buildout as superior to exit strategies in a power-constrained but demand-proximate market.\n\nForward momentum hinges on regional power infrastructure investment, particularly whether grid upgrades will shift the constraint rating upward or whether permitting headwinds will cement the current rating as a structural ceiling.","rationale":null,"verdict":"CAUTION","word_count":323},"pipeline":[],"power_grid":{"gen_additions_mw":850.0,"interconnection_pending_mw":null,"iso":"WECC","iso_queue":null,"queue_capacity_mw":null,"queue_wait_months":null,"reserve_margin_pct":20.0,"time_to_power_as_of":"2026-10-27T08:30:41.689716+00:00","time_to_power_basis":"DCPI modelled months to energize a new large load in this market (method: https://dchub.cloud/dcpi/methodology); a model estimate, not a utility date","time_to_power_months":19.3},"redirect_to":null,"requested":"seattle","risk":{"drought_months_d2_plus":null,"errors":{"drought_months_d2_plus":"no_drought_source_ingested"},"water_band":1,"water_band_label":"Low","water_category":"mean of 115 Aqueduct 4.0 baseline-annual basins (arid counted as","water_stress":11.1,"wildfire_seismic_note":"WUI wildfire exposure + Pacific seismic zones; check CalOES + USGS hazard layers before final site selection."},"slug":"seattle","tier":"FREE"}