Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 24.8x · EV/EBITDA 12.9x · ROE N/A. (1998–2025 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 | $127.3B | $174.8B | $169.2B | $129.6B | $80.7B | $99.2B | $91.7B | $89.4B | $82.7B | $86.8B | $73.4B |
| Enterprise Value | $129.3B | $176.9B | $170.2B | $132.3B | $81.5B | $99.4B | $93.5B | $92.1B | $88.7B | $93.8B | $78.4B |
| P/E Ratio → | 24.81 | 32.36 | 28.77 | 30.22 | 26.39 | 85.17 | 1557.52 | 18.37 | 20.69 | 37.08 | 34.37 |
| P/S Ratio | 4.73 | 6.49 | 7.13 | 6.07 | 4.72 | 9.06 | 13.49 | 5.93 | 5.69 | 6.85 | 6.83 |
| P/B Ratio | — | — | — | — | 29.01 | 16.06 | 18.74 | 15.06 | 9.41 | 7.71 | 7.45 |
| P/FCF | 14.00 | 19.24 | 21.44 | 18.51 | 13.05 | 39.44 | — | 19.87 | 16.89 | 19.85 | 20.07 |
| P/OCF | 13.52 | 18.58 | 20.33 | 17.64 | 12.32 | 35.19 | 1078.51 | 18.37 | 15.49 | 18.62 | 18.70 |
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 | — | 6.57 | 7.17 | 6.19 | 4.77 | 9.07 | 13.76 | 6.12 | 6.11 | 7.40 | 7.30 |
| EV / EBITDA | 12.87 | 17.60 | 20.49 | 20.35 | 14.28 | 32.11 | 8499.24 | 15.39 | 15.39 | 19.14 | 24.40 |
| EV / EBIT | 13.93 | 20.94 | 19.82 | 20.74 | 18.90 | 55.25 | 101.29 | 14.80 | 17.39 | 20.16 | 26.86 |
| EV / FCF | — | 19.47 | 21.56 | 18.90 | 13.18 | 39.50 | — | 20.49 | 18.12 | 21.44 | 21.46 |
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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 98.1% | 96.1% |
| Operating Margin | 34.5% | 34.5% | 31.8% | 27.3% | 29.9% | 22.8% | -9.3% | 35.5% | 36.8% | 35.8% | 27.1% |
| Net Profit Margin | 20.1% | 20.1% | 24.8% | 20.1% | 17.9% | 10.6% | 0.9% | 32.3% | 27.5% | 18.5% | 19.9% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | — | — | — | 22573.7% | 68.3% | 21.0% | 1.1% | 66.1% | 39.9% | 22.2% | 22.9% |
| ROA | 19.0% | 19.0% | 22.6% | 17.3% | 12.5% | 5.1% | 0.3% | 22.1% | 16.6% | 10.3% | 11.5% |
| ROIC | — | — | — | 247.9% | 77.1% | 28.7% | -6.1% | 34.1% | 24.2% | 20.5% | 15.4% |
| ROCE | 75.4% | 75.4% | 65.5% | 41.8% | 29.8% | 13.9% | -3.7% | 30.4% | 26.0% | 23.3% | 17.6% |
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 | — | — | — | — | 4.69 | 1.83 | 2.53 | 1.53 | 0.98 | 0.85 | 0.72 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 1.92 | 1.92 | 2.06 | 2.27 | 2.28 | 3.64 | 1125.45 | 1.52 | 1.50 | 1.94 | 2.22 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | — | — | — | 0.29 | 0.02 | 0.37 | 0.47 | 0.69 | 0.62 | 0.51 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.41 | 0.14 | 0.05 | 165.27 | 0.46 | 1.04 | 1.42 | 1.57 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 0.23 | 0.12 | 0.38 | 0.13 | 0.06 | — | 0.62 | 1.23 | 1.60 | 1.38 |
| Interest Coverage | 5.23 | 5.23 | 6.63 | 7.11 | 11.03 | 5.39 | 2.59 | 23.40 | 18.97 | 18.32 | 14.04 |
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 | 1.33 | 1.33 | 1.31 | 1.28 | 1.86 | 2.10 | 3.56 | 1.83 | 2.36 | 2.58 | 1.89 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.33 | 1.33 | 1.31 | 1.28 | 1.86 | 2.10 | 3.56 | 1.83 | 2.36 | 2.58 | 1.89 |
| Cash Ratio | 1.07 | 1.07 | 1.03 | 0.95 | 1.46 | 1.79 | 3.23 | 1.36 | 1.77 | 2.12 | 1.50 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.92 | 0.86 | 0.88 | 0.67 | 0.46 | 0.31 | 0.70 | 0.64 | 0.50 | 0.54 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 51.80 | 49.19 | 55.57 | 47.61 | 45.23 | 28.41 | 40.70 | 38.27 | 35.06 | 29.22 |
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 | 0.9% | 0.7% | 0.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | 23.1% | 23.1% | 20.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 4.0% | 3.1% | 3.5% | 3.3% | 3.8% | 1.2% | 0.1% | 5.4% | 4.8% | 2.7% | 2.9% |
| FCF Yield | 7.1% | 5.2% | 4.7% | 5.4% | 7.7% | 2.5% | — | 5.0% | 5.9% | 5.0% | 5.0% |
| Buyback Yield | 5.1% | 3.7% | 3.8% | 8.0% | 8.2% | 0.2% | 1.4% | 9.2% | 7.2% | 2.1% | 1.4% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 6.0% | 4.4% | 4.5% | 8.0% | 8.2% | 0.2% | 1.4% | 9.2% | 7.2% | 2.1% | 1.4% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $816M | $852M | $913M | $1.0B | $1.0B | $1.0B | $1.1B | $1.2B | $1.2B | $1.3B |
Includes 30+ ratios · 28 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 BKNG stock.
Booking Holdings Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 24.8x. The historical average is 31.1x. This places it at the 32th percentile of its historical range.
Booking Holdings Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 12.9x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 21.1x.
Based on historical data, Booking Holdings Inc. is trading at a P/E of 24.8x. This is at the 32th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Booking Holdings Inc.'s current dividend yield is 0.93% with a payout ratio of 23.1%.
Booking Holdings Inc. has 100.0% gross margin and 34.5% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Booking Holdings Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 1.9x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Regulatory and margin pressure
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Margin Resilience Amidst Deceleration
Operating margin expanded to 34.0% in Q2 2026 from 33.1% a year earlier, as reported in financial statements, despite revenue growth slowing to 8.1% YoY, suggesting cost discipline remains intact.
The 100% gross margin is an accounting artifact of the agency model, where the cost of the room is borne by the hotelier. The real profitability lever is operating margin, which has held above 30% for the last four quarters, indicating that marketing spend efficiency is being maintained even as growth decelerates. However, the Q2 2026 EPS miss of $2.54 versus $4.49 estimate, per recent disclosures, suggests that below-the-line items or one-time costs may be pressuring net income, warranting a closer look at the bridge from operating to net margin.
Working Capital Efficiency and Seasonality
DSO improved to 49 days in Q2 2026 from 51 days a year earlier, as per SEC filings, while the current ratio dipped to 1.09, indicating tighter liquidity but still efficient receivables management.
The cash conversion cycle is not fully calculable due to missing DIO and DPO data, but the DSO trend suggests that the company is collecting payments faster, likely due to a shift toward the merchant model. The current ratio of 1.09 is the lowest in the ten-quarter series, reflecting increased short-term liabilities, possibly from higher deferred revenue or accrued expenses. This warrants monitoring, as a ratio below 1.0 could signal liquidity strain, though the company's substantial cash balance of $17.2B provides a buffer.
Leverage Creeps Higher as Debt Outpaces Cash
D/EBITDA rose to 7.87 in Q2 2026 from 7.77 a year earlier, based on reported figures, while interest coverage improved to 9.53 from 3.64, indicating higher debt but also stronger earnings coverage.
The D/EBITDA ratio is elevated, but it is distorted by the seasonal trough in EBITDA during Q2; the peak quarter (Q3) shows a much lower ratio of 4.24. Interest coverage has improved significantly from the Q1 2025 trough of 1.61, suggesting that the company's earnings are more than sufficient to service its debt. However, the negative equity of $10.8B, as per balance sheet data, is a result of aggressive buybacks, and while it does not indicate insolvency given the cash pile, it does increase financial risk if cash flows were to deteriorate.
Liquidity Buffer Thins but Remains Adequate
Current ratio fell to 1.09 in Q2 2026 from 1.17 a year earlier, as reported in financial statements, while cash of $17.2B covers only 83% of total debt, suggesting a tighter liquidity position.
The quick ratio equals the current ratio at 1.09, indicating that inventory is not a factor, consistent with the asset-light model. The decline in the current ratio is driven by an increase in current liabilities, likely from higher deferred revenue and accrued marketing costs. Despite the thinning buffer, the company's ability to generate strong operating cash flow (FCF margin of 49.6% in Q2 2026) provides a cushion, but investors should monitor whether the trend continues, as a ratio below 1.0 would signal potential stress.
Premium Valuation vs. Expedia Justified by Margins
BKNG trades at 16.74 EV/EBITDA versus EXPE's 11.56, as per market data, but its net margin of 26.5% in Q2 2026 far exceeds EXPE's 8.8%, justifying the premium.
The valuation gap between BKNG and EXPE reflects BKNG's superior profitability and stronger moat in the European independent hotel market. However, BKNG's forward P/E of 20.50 implies a significant earnings growth expectation, which may be challenged by the recent deceleration in revenue growth and regulatory pressures. Compared to ABNB, BKNG trades at a discount on EV/EBITDA (16.74 vs. 32.32), but ABNB's higher growth and asset-light model may warrant a premium. The market appears to be pricing BKNG as a high-quality compounder, but the EPS miss and regulatory overhang suggest that this premium could compress if margins deteriorate.
Misapplied Metric: Gross Margin
The 100% gross margin is often misinterpreted as a sign of extreme profitability, but it is an accounting artifact of the agency model, as per financial statements, and obscures the true cost of acquiring customers.
Analysts should focus on take rate (revenue as a percentage of gross bookings) and marketing efficiency (SG&A as a percentage of revenue) instead of gross margin. The reported gross margin of 100% is misleading because the cost of the travel service is borne by the hotelier, not BKNG. The real cost structure is dominated by performance marketing, which is expensed in SG&A. Therefore, a more accurate measure of profitability is operating margin, which has been stable around 30-40%, but even that may overstate scalability if marketing spend is considered a variable cost of sales rather than a discretionary expense.