Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -137.5x · EV/EBITDA 58.5x · ROE -3.6%. (2015–2025 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 | $1.9B | $463M | $463M | $371M | $709M | $1.8B | $3.7B | $1.5B | $861M | $336M | — |
| Enterprise Value | $2.5B | $1.1B | $885M | $883M | $1.1B | $2.0B | $3.9B | $1.4B | $820M | $299M | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -137.51 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 640.50 | 47.94 | 62.49 | — |
| P/S Ratio | 2.52 | 0.61 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 1.24 | 3.67 | 10.79 | 6.59 | 4.22 | 2.06 | — |
| P/B Ratio | 4.43 | 1.16 | 1.48 | 1.25 | 2.61 | 4.36 | 8.61 | 5.67 | 7.92 | 4.38 | — |
| P/FCF | 28.30 | 6.89 | 6.63 | 19.40 | — | — | — | — | 84.57 | 50.49 | — |
| P/OCF | 21.26 | 5.18 | 5.52 | 9.50 | 20.32 | 44.13 | 819.46 | — | 34.97 | 22.99 | — |
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 | — | 1.41 | 1.18 | 1.47 | 1.90 | 4.02 | 11.47 | 5.90 | 4.02 | 1.83 | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 58.46 | 24.81 | 30.32 | 56.67 | 59.63 | 49.15 | 485.21 | — | 65.22 | 14.69 | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | — | 53.47 | — | — | — | 121.48 | 20.44 | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 15.79 | 12.66 | 46.23 | — | — | — | — | 80.52 | 44.85 | — |
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 | 35.8% | 35.8% | 37.4% | 39.3% | 41.6% | 44.5% | 46.0% | 46.3% | 47.0% | 45.2% | 44.0% |
| Operating Margin | -1.9% | -1.9% | -2.7% | -5.9% | -4.2% | -0.5% | -3.9% | -7.6% | 3.3% | 9.0% | 10.0% |
| Net Profit Margin | -1.7% | -1.7% | -0.9% | -2.7% | 3.4% | -5.6% | -12.8% | 1.1% | 8.8% | 3.7% | 14.7% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -3.6% | -3.6% | -2.1% | -5.7% | 5.7% | -6.5% | -12.6% | 1.3% | 19.3% | 15.7% | 2043.7% |
| ROA | -1.2% | -1.2% | -0.6% | -1.6% | 2.0% | -2.8% | -7.1% | 1.0% | 14.1% | 6.8% | 33.6% |
| ROIC | -1.2% | -1.2% | -1.9% | -3.6% | -3.0% | -0.3% | -2.6% | -15.0% | 9.5% | 28.6% | 48.3% |
| ROCE | -1.6% | -1.6% | -2.2% | -4.0% | -2.7% | -0.3% | -2.4% | -8.3% | 6.8% | 24.5% | 70.0% |
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 | 1.75 | 1.75 | 1.61 | 2.17 | 1.81 | 1.22 | 0.71 | 0.09 | — | 0.00 | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | 16.39 | 16.39 | 17.26 | 41.36 | 26.99 | 12.54 | 37.60 | — | — | 0.00 | 2.10 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 1.50 | 1.35 | 1.72 | 1.39 | 0.42 | 0.54 | -0.59 | -0.38 | -0.49 | — |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 13.98 | 13.98 | 14.45 | 32.89 | 20.76 | 4.28 | 28.70 | — | -3.28 | -1.85 | 1.78 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 8.90 | 6.03 | 26.83 | — | — | — | — | -4.05 | -5.64 | — |
| Interest Coverage | -7.18 | -7.18 | -3.81 | -22.89 | 6.68 | -0.09 | -0.82 | — | 22.43 | 8.46 | 16.79 |
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 | 1.39 | 1.39 | 1.34 | 2.06 | 2.45 | 4.42 | 2.10 | 4.91 | 2.79 | 2.66 | 0.92 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.39 | 1.39 | 1.34 | 2.06 | 2.45 | 4.42 | 2.10 | 4.91 | 2.79 | 2.66 | 0.92 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.72 | 0.72 | 0.60 | 1.25 | 1.62 | 3.55 | 1.22 | 4.04 | 1.79 | 1.53 | 0.22 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.67 | 0.76 | 0.55 | 0.62 | 0.46 | 0.39 | 0.66 | 1.36 | 1.56 | 2.17 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 44.26 | 42.16 | 47.46 | 47.42 | 45.78 | 58.77 | 47.37 | 42.93 | 47.54 | 40.40 |
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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 134.2% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.2% | 2.1% | 1.6% | — |
| FCF Yield | 3.5% | 14.5% | 15.1% | 5.2% | — | — | — | — | 1.2% | 2.0% | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $30M | $27M | $26M | $31M | $25M | $24M | $24M | $21M | $15M | $15M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 11 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 BAND stock.
Bandwidth Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -137.5x. The historical average is 55.2x.
Bandwidth Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 58.5x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 42.9x.
Bandwidth Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -3.6%. The historical average is -23.3%.
Based on historical data, Bandwidth Inc. is trading at a P/E of -137.5x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Bandwidth Inc. has 35.8% gross margin and -1.9% operating margin.
Bandwidth Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 16.4x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Persistent operating losses
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Margins Compress Despite Revenue Surge
Gross margin fell to 35.7% in 2026Q2 from 41.0% a year earlier, while operating margin remained near -2%, indicating pricing or mix pressures, per reported figures.
The 530 basis point gross margin decline over five quarters suggests that revenue growth is being purchased at the expense of unit economics, possibly due to competitive pricing or a shift toward lower-margin services. Operating margin has been stuck between -1% and -3% for ten quarters, implying that the company has not achieved operating leverage despite a 22% revenue increase. Net margin turned positive in 2026Q2 at 1.1%, but this appears driven by non-operating items, as operating income remained negative, so investors should focus on operating profitability rather than the bottom line.
Capital Returns Remain Subdued
ROIC has been negative for nine consecutive quarters, hovering around -0.4% in 2026Q2, while ROE turned slightly positive at 1.0% in 2026Q1, based on reported data.
The persistent negative ROIC indicates that the company is not generating returns above its cost of capital, which is typical for a growth-stage software firm but raises questions about long-term value creation. The slight improvement in ROE to 1.0% in 2026Q1 is likely due to a lower equity base from buybacks and debt reduction, not operational improvement. With gross margins compressing and operating margins negative, the path to positive ROIC appears dependent on achieving scale efficiencies, which have not yet materialized.
Working Capital Metrics Distorted
DSO spiked to 22,842 days in 2026Q2 from 42 days in 2026Q1, while DPO jumped to 15,829 days, rendering the cash conversion cycle uninterpretable, as per financial statements.
The extreme DSO and DPO figures in 2026Q2 likely reflect a data anomaly or a significant change in revenue recognition or billing terms, possibly related to a large contract or a reclassification. Excluding that quarter, DSO has been stable around 41-46 days, and DPO around 16-26 days, suggesting a typical working capital profile for a software company. The cash conversion cycle has been consistently negative or near zero, indicating that the company collects cash from customers before paying suppliers, which is a favorable position but may not be sustainable if the anomaly persists.
Leverage Eases but Coverage Thin
Debt-to-equity fell to 0.00 in 2026Q2 from 2.16 in 2024Q1, yet interest coverage was only 0.58x, indicating that operating income barely covers interest expense, per reported figures.
The dramatic reduction in D/E reflects both debt repayment and equity growth, but the low interest coverage ratio suggests that the company's operating losses are not sufficient to service its debt from operations alone. The negative interest coverage in several quarters (e.g., -8.02x in 2025Q4) indicates that the company has relied on cash reserves or external financing to meet interest obligations. While the balance sheet appears healthier with lower leverage, the thin coverage warrants monitoring, especially if interest rates rise or cash flows deteriorate.
Liquidity Buffer Thins Despite Ratio
Current ratio improved to 2.04 in 2026Q2 from 1.16 in 2024Q2, but cash dropped to $47.3M from $105.4M in 2024Q1, per balance sheet data.
The improvement in the current ratio is largely due to a reduction in current liabilities, not an increase in liquid assets, as cash has declined significantly. The quick ratio equals the current ratio, indicating that inventory is not a factor, which is typical for a software company. However, the shrinking cash balance, combined with negative operating income, suggests that the company may need to rely on its revolving credit facility or other sources to fund operations if cash flows do not improve.
Misapplied EV/EBITDA Multiple
EV/EBITDA of 50.2x is misleading because EBITDA is near zero or negative, making the multiple unstable and not reflective of underlying cash generation, as per reported figures.
For a company with negative operating income and volatile EBITDA, EV/EBITDA is a poor valuation metric because small changes in EBITDA can cause outsized swings in the multiple. A more appropriate metric is EV/Sales or EV/FCF, which are more stable and better capture the company's growth potential and cash generation. Investors should also consider the impact of stock-based compensation, which is a real economic cost but is excluded from EBITDA, potentially overstating the company's earnings power.