Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 11.4x · EV/EBITDA 10.9x · ROE 26.6%. (2012–2025 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 | $3.1B | $2.8B | $3.1B | $3.6B | $3.8B | $2.2B | $1.4B | $2.6B | $3.4B | $3.5B | $3.6B |
| Enterprise Value | $3.2B | $3.0B | $3.1B | $3.5B | $3.8B | $2.2B | $1.5B | $3.0B | $3.8B | $3.8B | $3.9B |
| P/E Ratio → | 11.38 | 10.38 | 12.70 | 8.49 | 7.96 | 13.42 | 13.63 | 12.59 | 11.38 | 17.76 | 72.23 |
| P/S Ratio | 7.33 | 6.66 | 7.00 | 7.17 | 4.83 | 4.25 | 4.66 | 5.32 | 5.53 | 8.04 | 13.81 |
| P/B Ratio | 2.74 | 2.50 | 2.72 | 2.95 | 3.13 | 2.02 | 1.30 | 2.39 | 2.80 | 3.17 | 4.96 |
| P/FCF | 10.37 | 9.43 | 8.00 | 7.16 | 9.18 | 8.88 | 4.99 | 8.70 | 38.26 | — | — |
| P/OCF | 9.98 | 9.07 | 7.91 | 6.89 | 8.91 | 8.38 | 4.90 | 6.35 | 8.74 | 12.26 | 18.32 |
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 | — | 7.02 | 7.05 | 7.03 | 4.84 | 4.41 | 5.06 | 6.10 | 6.19 | 8.93 | 14.99 |
| EV / EBITDA | 10.86 | 9.92 | 9.74 | 7.51 | 7.15 | 8.99 | 6.97 | 8.72 | 8.53 | 13.34 | 29.87 |
| EV / EBIT | 12.45 | 9.60 | 11.30 | 8.28 | 7.85 | 11.89 | 11.35 | 12.76 | 11.93 | 22.20 | 140.94 |
| EV / FCF | — | 9.94 | 8.06 | 7.02 | 9.19 | 9.21 | 5.42 | 9.98 | 42.86 | — | — |
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 | 74.9% | 74.9% | 76.2% | 77.2% | 83.9% | 75.5% | 53.0% | 61.9% | 66.3% | 58.3% | 39.9% |
| Operating Margin | 61.8% | 61.8% | 62.2% | 84.5% | 61.5% | 37.0% | 44.5% | 47.7% | 52.2% | 40.1% | 10.5% |
| Net Profit Margin | 71.0% | 71.0% | 61.7% | 84.3% | 60.8% | 36.0% | 41.1% | 43.5% | 48.5% | 36.6% | 7.7% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 26.6% | 26.6% | 23.1% | 34.8% | 41.9% | 17.1% | 11.3% | 18.6% | 25.8% | 17.3% | 2.5% |
| ROA | 23.5% | 23.5% | 21.8% | 33.3% | 37.8% | 14.6% | 8.7% | 13.0% | 17.8% | 11.6% | 1.8% |
| ROIC | 16.1% | 16.1% | 17.8% | 26.9% | 30.7% | 12.1% | 7.4% | 11.4% | 15.5% | 10.3% | 2.1% |
| ROCE | 20.9% | 20.9% | 22.5% | 34.1% | 40.0% | 15.8% | 9.7% | 14.7% | 19.9% | 13.4% | 2.7% |
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 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.02 | — | 0.01 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.36 | 0.34 | 0.36 | 0.44 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 0.51 | 0.51 | 0.08 | — | 0.02 | 0.36 | 0.56 | 1.14 | 0.93 | 1.35 | 2.42 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.14 | 0.02 | -0.06 | 0.00 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.35 | 0.34 | 0.35 | 0.42 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 0.51 | 0.51 | 0.07 | -0.15 | 0.01 | 0.32 | 0.55 | 1.12 | 0.92 | 1.33 | 2.34 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 0.51 | 0.06 | -0.14 | 0.01 | 0.33 | 0.43 | 1.28 | 4.60 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 34.59 | 34.59 | 88.27 | 154.43 | 76.80 | 33.28 | 12.70 | 11.00 | 15.24 | 11.01 | 3.67 |
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 | 3.88 | 3.88 | 2.58 | 7.48 | 5.64 | 1.40 | 1.67 | 3.43 | 2.43 | 1.47 | 1.11 |
| Quick Ratio | 3.88 | 3.88 | 2.58 | 7.48 | 4.62 | 1.40 | 1.67 | 3.43 | 2.43 | 1.47 | 1.11 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 2.72 | 0.14 | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.27 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.14 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.32 | 0.36 | 0.40 | 0.62 | 0.41 | 0.24 | 0.32 | 0.35 | 0.27 | 0.23 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | 4.02 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 56.67 | 59.05 | 59.91 | 63.15 | 70.11 | 76.17 | 57.93 | 67.75 | 68.55 | 95.41 |
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 | 9.3% | 10.2% | 10.9% | 11.1% | 8.5% | 8.2% | 10.2% | 11.7% | 7.4% | 5.6% | 4.9% |
| Payout Ratio | 95.2% | 95.2% | 124.2% | 94.4% | 67.7% | 97.2% | 115.2% | 143.4% | 84.6% | 123.9% | 871.0% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 8.8% | 9.6% | 7.9% | 11.8% | 12.6% | 7.5% | 7.3% | 7.9% | 8.8% | 5.6% | 1.4% |
| FCF Yield | 9.6% | 10.6% | 12.5% | 14.0% | 10.9% | 11.3% | 20.0% | 11.5% | 2.6% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.4% | 0.6% | 0.4% | 0.8% | 1.3% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 9.4% | 10.3% | 11.1% | 11.3% | 8.6% | 8.3% | 10.5% | 12.4% | 7.8% | 6.4% | 6.2% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $212M | $211M | $225M | $224M | $208M | $207M | $206M | $218M | $193M | $192M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 14 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 BSM stock.
Black Stone Minerals, L.P.'s current P/E ratio is 11.4x. The historical average is 18.1x. This places it at the 30th percentile of its historical range.
Black Stone Minerals, L.P.'s current EV/EBITDA is 10.9x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 11.1x.
Black Stone Minerals, L.P.'s return on equity (ROE) is 26.6%. This is above the typical threshold of 15-20% considered good for most companies. The historical average is 19.4%.
Based on historical data, Black Stone Minerals, L.P. is trading at a P/E of 11.4x. This is at the 30th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Black Stone Minerals, L.P.'s current dividend yield is 9.27% with a payout ratio of 95.2%.
Black Stone Minerals, L.P. has 74.9% gross margin and 61.8% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Black Stone Minerals, L.P.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 0.5x, indicating low leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Gas price sensitivity and revenue volatility
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Margin Resilience Amid Gas Weakness
BSM's gross margin averaged 78% over the last four quarters, with 2026Q2 at 81.3%, per financial statements, reflecting a royalty model that avoids lifting costs and sustains profitability despite gas price pressure.
The reported gross margin of 81.3% in 2026Q2, up from 68.7% in 2025Q4, underscores the structural advantage of fee mineral ownership, where production taxes are the primary variable cost. Operating margin swung from 14.9% in 2025Q1 to 77.3% in 2026Q1, indicating that non-cash items and timing effects can distort quarterly comparisons, but the underlying cost base remains exceptionally low. Net margin of 87.1% in 2026Q2, though inflated by non-cash gains, still highlights the high conversion of revenue to profit, a trait that distinguishes BSM from traditional E&Ps.
ROIC Volatility Masks Underlying Efficiency
ROIC ranged from 1.1% in 2025Q1 to 8.7% in 2026Q1, per reported data, reflecting commodity price swings rather than capital efficiency changes, as BSM's asset base is largely legacy mineral rights with minimal reinvestment needs.
The wide quarterly swings in ROIC, from 1.1% to 8.7%, are driven by revenue volatility and non-cash items, not by changes in invested capital, which has remained stable near $1.1B. ROE similarly oscillated between 1.2% and 11.1%, but the trend suggests that returns are highly sensitive to natural gas prices, with 2026Q2's 9.7% ROE indicating a recovery from the 1.2% trough in 2026Q1. Investors should focus on the average ROIC over a full commodity cycle, which appears to be in the mid-single digits, rather than any single quarter, to gauge the true compounding power of the perpetual mineral portfolio.
Working Capital Efficiency Hides Cash Timing
DSO fluctuated between 34 and 85 days over the last ten quarters, per financial statements, while DPO remained low, suggesting that BSM's working capital swings are timing-driven rather than indicative of structural inefficiency.
The wide range in DSO, from 34 days in 2026Q1 to 85 days in 2025Q3, likely reflects the lumpy nature of lease bonus payments and the timing of royalty collections, not a deterioration in receivables management. With DPO consistently below 25 days, BSM does not rely on supplier financing, consistent with its minimal operating liabilities. The absence of inventory (DIO not reported) is typical for a royalty model, and the cash conversion cycle is effectively negative, meaning BSM collects cash before paying its modest obligations, a structural advantage over operators.
Debt Buildup Remains Modest
Debt-to-equity rose from zero in 2024Q3 to 0.18 in 2026Q2, per balance sheet data, while interest coverage stayed above 28x, indicating that leverage is manageable and refinancing risk is low.
The increase in debt from $0 to $196M over two years, as reported, appears deliberate, yet the D/E ratio of 0.18 remains far below peers like VNOM (0.21) and is offset by a fortress-like equity base of $1.1B. Interest coverage of 28.87x in 2026Q2, though down from 129x in 2024Q3, still provides ample cushion, and the low absolute debt level suggests no near-term covenant concerns. However, the rapid accumulation of debt while distributions average $82.5M per quarter warrants monitoring, as it may indicate that cash generation is not fully covering distributions, a trend that could pressure the balance sheet if gas prices remain weak.
Thin Cash but Strong Current Ratio
Cash dropped to $1.7M in 2026Q2 from $40.5M in 2024Q1, per balance sheet data, yet the current ratio of 3.76 indicates adequate short-term coverage, though the buffer is thin.
The current ratio of 3.76 in 2026Q2, down from 5.61 in 2024Q3, still suggests that current assets comfortably cover current liabilities, but the near-zero cash balance highlights the distribution-heavy model that passes through cash to unitholders. In a severe stress scenario, such as a prolonged gas price downturn, BSM's lack of cash reserves could force it to rely on its undrawn credit facility or reduce distributions, though its low debt and stable equity provide a cushion. The quick ratio equals the current ratio, as inventory is negligible, reinforcing that liquidity is not dependent on inventory conversion.
Misapplied Metric: P/E on GAAP Earnings
The P/E ratio of 11.30, based on TTM GAAP earnings, is misleading for BSM because non-cash derivative gains and depletion distort net income, per reported figures, obscuring the true cash-generating ability.
GAAP net income is heavily influenced by mark-to-market hedging gains and losses, as evidenced by net margins swinging from 7% to 117% over the last ten quarters, making the P/E ratio unreliable for valuation. Instead, investors should use distributable cash flow (DCF) or price-to-FCF, which better reflect the cash available for distributions; BSM's P/FCF of 10.30 is more meaningful. The market's focus on P/E may lead to undervaluation when non-cash losses depress earnings, or overvaluation when gains inflate them, so a DCF-based yield comparison with peers like VNOM and KRP is more appropriate.