Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 19.1x · EV/EBITDA 4.0x · ROE 12.1%. (2007–2025 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 | $7.1B | $6.7B | $3.2B | $3.9B | $3.8B | $4.2B | $5.9B | $4.1B | $3.1B | $3.1B | $2.3B |
| Enterprise Value | $7.4B | $6.9B | $3.3B | $3.8B | $3.2B | $3.6B | $5.5B | $4.2B | $3.4B | $3.6B | $2.6B |
| P/E Ratio → | 19.11 | 16.11 | — | 385.37 | 14.88 | 9.82 | 9.49 | 13.83 | 29.20 | 53.26 | 58.52 |
| P/S Ratio | 2.33 | 2.18 | 1.68 | 2.02 | 2.21 | 2.37 | 3.31 | 3.55 | 2.50 | 4.81 | 3.31 |
| P/B Ratio | 2.18 | 1.84 | 1.05 | 1.01 | 1.23 | 1.41 | 2.22 | 2.00 | 1.85 | 1.96 | 1.56 |
| P/FCF | 107.39 | 100.61 | — | 6.13 | 12.72 | 8.92 | 8.86 | 19.23 | 17.06 | — | 37.19 |
| P/OCF | 7.98 | 7.48 | 3.64 | 5.47 | 6.73 | 5.86 | 5.99 | 8.54 | 6.78 | 19.83 | 5.50 |
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 | — | 2.26 | 1.73 | 1.96 | 1.86 | 2.03 | 3.10 | 3.65 | 2.80 | 5.68 | 3.81 |
| EV / EBITDA | 4.00 | 3.75 | 3.42 | 3.52 | 3.64 | 3.27 | 4.09 | 5.56 | 6.59 | 14.35 | 8.79 |
| EV / EBIT | 5.25 | 6.83 | — | 11.36 | 5.96 | 4.84 | 5.28 | 8.30 | 12.16 | 44.35 | 33.51 |
| EV / FCF | — | 104.37 | — | 5.95 | 10.75 | 7.65 | 8.31 | 19.80 | 19.16 | — | 42.81 |
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 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 37.1% | 40.3% | 34.9% | 43.6% | 53.6% | 39.0% | 29.8% | 23.5% | 30.7% |
| Operating Margin | 45.9% | 45.9% | 31.3% | 34.9% | 29.0% | 40.5% | 58.9% | 44.0% | 23.4% | 13.6% | 18.5% |
| Net Profit Margin | 13.1% | 13.1% | -33.1% | 0.5% | 14.6% | 23.8% | 35.1% | 25.4% | 2.4% | 8.9% | 5.7% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 12.1% | 12.1% | -18.2% | 0.3% | 8.3% | 15.0% | 26.7% | 15.8% | 1.8% | 3.8% | 2.8% |
| ROA | 7.5% | 7.5% | -13.0% | 0.2% | 7.0% | 12.1% | 20.8% | 11.2% | 1.1% | 2.3% | 1.8% |
| ROIC | 30.0% | 30.0% | 12.9% | 16.1% | 15.5% | 23.0% | 35.4% | 18.1% | 10.3% | 3.3% | 5.4% |
| ROCE | 31.1% | 31.1% | 13.6% | 16.9% | 14.8% | 22.3% | 37.6% | 20.9% | 12.6% | 4.0% | 6.2% |
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 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.14 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.13 | 0.29 | 0.45 | 0.33 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 0.34 | 0.34 | 0.45 | 0.18 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.34 | 0.92 | 2.78 | 1.64 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.07 | 0.03 | -0.03 | -0.19 | -0.20 | -0.14 | 0.06 | 0.23 | 0.35 | 0.24 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.10 | -0.11 | -0.67 | -0.55 | -0.27 | 0.16 | 0.72 | 2.19 | 1.15 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 3.76 | — | -0.18 | -1.98 | -1.28 | -0.55 | 0.57 | 2.10 | — | 5.62 |
| Interest Coverage | 26.91 | 26.91 | -7.87 | 24.00 | 49.94 | 62.56 | 66.46 | 19.17 | 9.21 | 6.34 | 7.64 |
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 | 1.06 | 1.06 | 1.55 | 2.27 | 4.43 | 4.52 | 2.67 | 2.60 | 1.75 | 0.80 | 1.57 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.47 | 0.47 | 0.73 | 1.16 | 3.01 | 3.35 | 1.83 | 1.28 | 0.62 | 0.38 | 0.98 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.60 | 0.98 | 2.79 | 2.91 | 1.68 | 0.85 | 0.50 | 0.30 | 0.82 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.52 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.47 | 0.50 | 0.53 | 0.43 | 0.48 | 0.24 | 0.29 |
| Inventory Turnover | 2.44 | 2.44 | 2.51 | 3.35 | 3.40 | 3.65 | 3.49 | 3.24 | 3.68 | 2.37 | 4.52 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 10.76 | 12.76 | 9.14 | 9.11 | 8.76 | 5.75 | 14.76 | 7.84 | 23.97 | 14.80 |
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 | 1.3% | 1.6% | 5.8% | 4.9% | 4.3% | 4.0% | 2.1% | 0.3% | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | 26.2% | 26.2% | — | 1883.2% | 64.8% | 39.7% | 19.3% | 3.6% | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 5.2% | 6.2% | — | 0.3% | 6.7% | 10.2% | 10.5% | 7.2% | 3.4% | 1.9% | 1.7% |
| FCF Yield | 0.9% | 1.0% | — | 16.3% | 7.9% | 11.2% | 11.3% | 5.2% | 5.9% | — | 2.7% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 1.5% | 1.7% | 5.8% | 4.9% | 4.3% | 4.0% | 2.1% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $1.5B | $1.3B | $1.2B | $1.1B | $1.1B | $1.1B | $1.0B | $1.0B | $991M | $955M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 19 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 BTG stock.
B2Gold Corp.'s current P/E ratio is 19.1x. The historical average is 27.1x. This places it at the 42th percentile of its historical range.
B2Gold Corp.'s current EV/EBITDA is 4.0x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 8.8x.
B2Gold Corp.'s return on equity (ROE) is 12.1%. The historical average is 0.6%.
Based on historical data, B2Gold Corp. is trading at a P/E of 19.1x. This is at the 42th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
B2Gold Corp.'s current dividend yield is 1.33% with a payout ratio of 26.2%.
B2Gold Corp. has 50.0% gross margin and 45.9% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
B2Gold Corp.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 0.3x, indicating low leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Mali political and tax risk
Deep Discount Despite Strong Growth
BTG trades at 3.85x EV/EBITDA versus peers averaging 11x, and forward P/E of 8.14 implies the market is pricing in significant Mali risk despite 60.9% revenue growth.
The forward P/E of 8.14 versus trailing 18.36 suggests the market expects a sharp earnings decline, likely due to concerns over the new Mali mining code and the capital-intensive Goose Project. EV/EBITDA of 3.85 is a fraction of the peer average of ~11x, indicating a substantial jurisdiction discount. This valuation appears to price in a permanent impairment of Fekola's economics, which may be overly punitive given the company's low-cost position and clean balance sheet.
Operating Margins Mask Net Drag
Operating margin of 45.9% TTM is among the highest in the peer group, but net margin of 13.1% reveals a 32.8 percentage-point gap, suggesting significant non-operating charges or tax effects.
The wide gap between operating and net margins is a red flag for earnings quality. While gross margin of 50% confirms the high-grade, low-cost advantage at Fekola, the net margin compression likely stems from impairment charges, higher effective tax rates, or equity method losses. Investors should monitor whether this gap narrows as the Goose Project ramps up and Mali's tax regime stabilizes. The 2024Q3 impairment of $633.8M appears to be a one-off, but the persistence of the gap in 2026Q2 (net margin 52.9% vs operating 35.5%) suggests timing effects that warrant scrutiny.
ROIC Recovery After Impairment
ROIC swung from -12.9% in 2024Q3 to 11.2% in 2026Q1, but the 2026Q2 drop to 5.2% indicates volatility tied to capital spending and working capital swings.
The recovery in ROIC from the 2024Q3 trough reflects the rebound in gold prices and the high-margin Fekola operations. However, the 2026Q2 ROIC of 5.2% is below the cost of capital, suggesting that the heavy investment in Goose and the working capital build are temporarily depressing returns. The company's ROE of 10.5% in 2026Q2 is below peers like Kinross (35.3%) and AngloGold (37.5%), indicating that BTG is not yet generating superior returns on equity despite its operational strengths. The key driver will be whether Goose delivers on its promised returns without cost overruns.
Working Capital Drag Intensifies
Cash conversion cycle widened from 65 days in 2024Q1 to 106 days in 2026Q2, driven by a 132-day inventory holding period, indicating slower cash conversion despite strong sales.
The CCC expansion is concerning because it suggests that inventory is building up, possibly due to gold-in-circuit at new projects or slower sales. DIO rose from 112 days to 132 days over the period, while DPO remained stable around 36 days, indicating that BTG is financing its inventory with its own cash rather than supplier credit. This is a drag on free cash flow, which turned negative in 2026Q2. The company's asset turnover of 0.13 is low, typical for capital-intensive mining, but the working capital inefficiency is a self-inflicted headwind that management should address.
Conservative Leverage, Rising Debt
Debt-to-equity rose from 0.01 to 0.11 over two years, but interest coverage of 18.2x remains comfortable, indicating ample capacity to service debt despite increased borrowing for Goose.
BTG's leverage is still minimal compared to peers, but the trend is upward as the company funds the Goose Project. The D/EBITDA ratio of 1.16 in 2026Q2 is well below the 3x covenant threshold typical for miners, and interest coverage of 18.2x provides a wide margin of safety. However, the increase in debt from $40.5M to $455.5M suggests a strategic shift toward using leverage to finance growth, which could become a risk if gold prices fall or construction costs overrun. The company's near-zero leverage historically has been a competitive advantage, and investors should monitor whether this discipline erodes.
Liquidity Cushion Thins
Current ratio fell from 2.99 in 2024Q1 to 1.58 in 2026Q2, while quick ratio dropped to 0.58, indicating a reduced ability to cover short-term obligations without inventory sales.
The quick ratio below 1.0 is a warning sign for a mining company, as it suggests that BTG may struggle to meet near-term liabilities if gold sales were to pause. The decline in cash from $567.8M to $286.2M reflects heavy capex and working capital absorption. However, the company's access to undrawn credit facilities and its low debt levels provide alternative liquidity sources. The current ratio of 1.58 is still above 1.0, but the trend is concerning, and investors should monitor whether the Goose Project's capital demands further erode the liquidity buffer.
Valuation Gap vs. Peers
BTG's EV/EBITDA of 3.85 is less than half the peer average of 8.8, while its ROE of 10.5% lags Kinross's 35.3%, indicating the market is pricing in higher risk.
The valuation discount is stark: BTG trades at 3.85x EV/EBITDA versus Eldorado's 8.56x and Kinross's 7.40x. This gap likely reflects the market's perception of Mali political risk and the execution risk of the Goose Project. However, BTG's net margin of 13.1% is below peers like Kinross (33.9%) and AngloGold (26.6%), which may justify some discount. The company's low leverage and high gross margin suggest that the discount may be overdone, but until the market sees evidence of stable cash flows from Goose and a resolution of Mali's mining code, the discount is likely to persist.
Misapplied EV/EBITDA Multiple
EV/EBITDA is commonly used for miners, but for BTG it obscures the impact of heavy capex and working capital swings, making P/FCF a more telling metric.
BTG's EV/EBITDA of 3.85 appears cheap, but this ignores the significant capital expenditures required to sustain and grow production. The P/FCF of 103.17 reveals that free cash flow is nearly nonexistent relative to market cap, highlighting that EBITDA overstates cash generation. For a company in a growth phase like BTG, EV/EBITDA can be misleading because it does not account for the cash needed for development projects. Investors should focus on EV/EBITDAX (excluding exploration) and EV/2P reserves to better capture the value of the asset base, or use P/NAV to incorporate the full lifecycle costs.