Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 13.6x · EV/EBITDA 11.3x · ROE 4.7%. (1996–2025 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $33.7B | $27.8B | $24.9B | $39.1B | $52.3B | $38.3B | $28.4B | $26.2B | $23.2B | $22.9B | $27.0B |
| Enterprise Value | $42.5B | $36.6B | $35.8B | $47.4B | $61.5B | $47.9B | $38.8B | $35.2B | $29.6B | $29.6B | $33.3B |
| P/E Ratio → | 13.64 | 25.78 | 13.84 | 11.23 | 12.04 | 14.11 | 16.00 | 19.00 | 12.84 | 14.37 | 21.13 |
| P/S Ratio | 0.40 | 0.35 | 0.29 | 0.42 | 0.51 | 0.45 | 0.44 | 0.41 | 0.36 | 0.38 | 0.43 |
| P/B Ratio | 1.47 | 1.21 | 1.11 | 1.60 | 2.12 | 1.68 | 1.41 | 1.36 | 1.22 | 1.25 | 1.57 |
| P/FCF | 97.46 | 6.62 | 20.30 | 13.20 | 24.21 | 7.05 | — | — | — | 19.73 | 45.50 |
| P/OCF | 6.19 | 5.10 | 8.93 | 8.78 | 15.03 | 5.80 | — | — | — | 10.37 | 18.29 |
P/E links to full P/E history page with 30-year chart
Enterprise-value multiples — capital-structure-neutral measures of total business value
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 0.46 | 0.42 | 0.50 | 0.61 | 0.56 | 0.60 | 0.54 | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.53 |
| EV / EBITDA | 11.33 | 14.04 | 11.15 | 9.26 | 11.74 | 12.01 | 14.14 | 13.30 | 10.02 | 12.02 | 13.12 |
| EV / EBIT | 29.82 | 19.59 | 12.10 | 9.59 | 10.93 | 13.39 | 17.45 | 17.69 | 12.22 | 15.27 | 15.74 |
| EV / FCF | — | 8.70 | 29.20 | 15.97 | 28.50 | 8.83 | — | — | — | 25.49 | 56.14 |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 6.3% | 6.3% | 6.8% | 8.0% | 7.5% | 7.0% | 6.9% | 6.4% | 6.5% | 5.8% | 5.8% |
| Operating Margin | 1.8% | 1.8% | 2.4% | 4.3% | 4.1% | 3.5% | 2.7% | 2.6% | 3.1% | 2.5% | 2.6% |
| Net Profit Margin | 1.3% | 1.3% | 2.1% | 3.7% | 4.3% | 3.2% | 2.8% | 2.1% | 2.8% | 2.6% | 2.1% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 4.7% | 4.7% | 7.7% | 14.2% | 18.3% | 12.6% | 9.0% | 7.2% | 9.7% | 9.0% | 7.3% |
| ROA | 2.0% | 2.0% | 3.3% | 6.1% | 7.5% | 5.1% | 3.8% | 3.3% | 4.5% | 4.0% | 3.2% |
| ROIC | 3.3% | 3.3% | 4.7% | 9.1% | 9.5% | 7.1% | 4.5% | 4.6% | 6.0% | 4.8% | 5.3% |
| ROCE | 4.3% | 4.3% | 6.0% | 11.3% | 12.1% | 9.1% | 5.7% | 5.6% | 7.1% | 5.7% | 6.1% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.42 | 0.42 | 0.51 | 0.39 | 0.42 | 0.46 | 0.55 | 0.51 | 0.44 | 0.41 | 0.40 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 3.75 | 3.75 | 3.59 | 1.88 | 1.96 | 2.65 | 4.03 | 3.73 | 2.84 | 3.04 | 2.73 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.38 | 0.49 | 0.34 | 0.38 | 0.42 | 0.52 | 0.47 | 0.34 | 0.36 | 0.37 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 3.36 | 3.36 | 3.40 | 1.61 | 1.77 | 2.42 | 3.79 | 3.41 | 2.16 | 2.71 | 2.49 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 2.08 | 8.91 | 2.77 | 4.28 | 1.78 | — | — | — | 5.76 | 10.64 |
| Interest Coverage | 3.05 | 3.05 | 4.19 | 7.57 | 13.90 | 12.60 | 6.94 | 4.94 | 6.64 | 5.86 | 7.27 |
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 1.37 | 1.37 | 1.39 | 1.60 | 1.46 | 1.45 | 1.50 | 1.55 | 1.75 | 1.59 | 1.60 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.83 | 0.83 | 0.81 | 0.95 | 0.85 | 0.79 | 0.86 | 0.89 | 1.00 | 0.86 | 0.93 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.17 | 0.06 | 0.07 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 1.53 | 1.61 | 1.72 | 1.70 | 1.52 | 1.29 | 1.47 | 1.58 | 1.52 | 1.57 |
| Inventory Turnover | 7.26 | 7.26 | 6.89 | 7.23 | 6.36 | 5.47 | 5.11 | 6.60 | 6.83 | 6.25 | 6.65 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 21.86 | 25.39 | 25.24 | 27.20 | 24.71 | 28.27 | 29.39 | 21.81 | 22.57 | 25.79 |
Earnings, FCF, buyback, and dividend yields — total returns to shareholders
Full dividend history and growth charts are on the Dividend History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | 2.9% | 3.5% | 4.0% | 2.5% | 1.7% | 2.2% | 2.9% | 3.0% | 3.3% | 3.2% | 2.6% |
| Payout Ratio | 91.6% | 91.6% | 54.7% | 28.1% | 20.7% | 30.8% | 45.7% | 57.2% | 41.9% | 45.8% | 54.8% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 7.3% | 3.9% | 7.2% | 8.9% | 8.3% | 7.1% | 6.2% | 5.3% | 7.8% | 7.0% | 4.7% |
| FCF Yield | 1.0% | 15.1% | 4.9% | 7.6% | 4.1% | 14.2% | — | — | — | 5.1% | 2.2% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.3% | 6.8% | 2.8% | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.6% | 0.3% | 3.3% | 3.7% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 2.9% | 3.5% | 13.3% | 9.3% | 4.5% | 2.2% | 3.3% | 3.6% | 3.6% | 6.5% | 6.3% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $484M | $493M | $542M | $563M | $566M | $563M | $565M | $567M | $572M | $591M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 30 years · Updated daily
Live VCP patterns, Cup & Handle overlays, support/resistance, and AI trade plans.
High-probability breakout stocks crossing their pivot across 5 pattern engines.
DCF models, multiple analysis, and analyst estimates.
10-year return with dividends reinvested.
Compare growth, multiples, and margins vs sector.
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying ADM stock.
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company's current P/E ratio is 13.6x. The historical average is 18.2x. This places it at the 33th percentile of its historical range.
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company's current EV/EBITDA is 11.3x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 10.8x.
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company's return on equity (ROE) is 4.7%. The historical average is 9.7%.
Based on historical data, Archer-Daniels-Midland Company is trading at a P/E of 13.6x. This is at the 33th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company's current dividend yield is 2.91% with a payout ratio of 91.6%.
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company has 6.3% gross margin and 1.8% operating margin.
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 3.7x, indicating high leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Thin margins amid volatile earnings
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Trailing Multiple Inflated by Earnings Trough
Based on reported figures, ADM trades at 31.6x trailing earnings but only 12.75x forward, against a 16.4x trailing EV/EBITDA that compresses to 8.3x forward, indicating the market is pricing a sharp earnings recovery rather than current results. Peer BG trades at 20.0x trailing P/E.
The gap between trailing and forward multiples suggests trailing earnings were depressed by a weak 2025 period and that the forward figure rests heavily on the 2026 recovery. Compared with BG at roughly 20x trailing and INGR at 8.7x, ADM's valuation appears to embed continued margin normalization, which investors should monitor against quarterly delivery. A P/S of 0.42 remains low, but with net margins near 1.3% on a multi-year basis, low sales multiples may reflect structurally thin profitability rather than a clear discount.
Thin Margins Limit Earnings Cushion
As reported in quarterly statements, ADM's gross margin rose from 4.7% in 2025Q2 to 8.4% in 2026Q3, yet the operating margin of 4.2% and net margin of 3.7% remain thin relative to Ingredion's 25.3% gross margin and 10.1% net margin.
The improvement in gross and operating margin across recent quarters suggests better cost absorption and favorable crush and biofuel spreads, but the absolute level leaves little room for error. ADM's economics are those of a high-volume intermediary, so modest spread compression can erase much of the reported profit. Investors should treat the 2026 margin expansion as cyclical until it persists across a full commodity cycle.
Returns Recovering From Near-Zero Levels
Based on ADM's reported quarterly figures, ROIC improved from 0.2% in 2025Q2 to 2.9% in 2026Q3, and ROE rose to 3.4%, still well below Ingredion's 15.5% ROIC and 13.4% ROE.
The recovery in returns is directionally positive but the level remains low for a company carrying $55.4B of total assets, implying heavy capital intensity relative to earnings. The spread between ROIC and a typical cost of capital appears narrow or negative for much of the ten-quarter window, which warrants monitoring. Returns are being driven primarily by margin recovery rather than asset efficiency, so sustainability depends on margins holding.
Working Capital Swings Drive Cash Position
According to reported quarterly balance sheets, ADM's current ratio held between 1.31 and 1.45 while cash fell to $591M in 2026Q1 before recovering to $9.6B in 2026Q3, indicating large swings in liquidity.
A current ratio near 1.4 appears adequate on its face, but the quick ratio of roughly 0.8 to 0.9 shows reliance on inventory to meet short-term obligations. The volatility in cash balances suggests liquidity is tied to working capital cycles rather than a stable reserve. Under a severe commodity or margin shock, inventory-dependent liquidity may prove less resilient than the headline ratios imply.
Headline Leverage Understates Obligations
Based on reported figures, the 0.42 debt-to-equity ratio appears conservative, yet the 8.2x debt-to-EBITDA in 2026Q3 and interest coverage of 7.0x suggest debt service is more meaningful than the equity-based ratio implies.
Debt-to-equity captures only funded debt relative to book equity and may not reflect trade finance, lease, or other working capital obligations that are common in this business model. The elevated debt-to-EBITDA on trailing earnings indicates that leverage relative to earnings power is higher than the balance sheet ratio suggests. This warrants further investigation into the composition of obligations before concluding the leverage profile is benign.