Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -109.1x · EV/EBITDA 18.0x · ROE 4.8%. (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 | $346M | $520M | $712M | $624M | $395M | $501M | $403M | — | — | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $1.2B | $1.4B | $1.6B | $1.5B | $1.0B | $1.1B | $873M | — | — | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -109.07 | 15.11 | 9.66 | 7.46 | 25.56 | 5.99 | 7.36 | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 4.86 | 3.33 | 8.53 | 6.75 | 17.03 | 5.90 | 8.30 | — | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 0.49 | 0.74 | 0.96 | 0.84 | 0.64 | 0.77 | 0.72 | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | 5.92 | 6.97 | 8.61 | 10.10 | 6.76 | 17.61 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 4.63 | 6.97 | 8.61 | 10.10 | 6.76 | 17.61 | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | — | 8.89 | 18.90 | 15.81 | 45.00 | 13.21 | 17.97 | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 18.00 | 11.35 | 21.11 | 17.38 | 63.18 | 12.86 | 15.39 | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 10.21 | 14.84 | 21.11 | 17.38 | 63.18 | 12.86 | 15.76 | — | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 18.59 | 19.07 | 23.64 | 17.86 | 39.44 | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | 78.0% | 78.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| Operating Margin | 76.1% | 76.1% | 89.5% | 91.0% | 71.2% | 102.8% | 114.0% | 117.3% | 110.4% | 81.1% | 77.9% |
| Net Profit Margin | 22.1% | 22.1% | 88.2% | 90.7% | 67.1% | 98.5% | 112.5% | 115.8% | 107.7% | 79.0% | 77.9% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 4.8% | 4.8% | 9.9% | 12.4% | 2.5% | 13.8% | 11.3% | 6.6% | 2.0% | 2.9% | 6.0% |
| ROA | 2.1% | 2.1% | 4.5% | 5.7% | 1.2% | 7.1% | 6.1% | 4.7% | 1.9% | 3.3% | 6.4% |
| ROIC | 5.6% | 5.6% | 3.5% | 4.4% | 1.0% | 5.7% | 4.7% | 3.1% | 1.1% | 1.8% | 4.0% |
| ROCE | 7.4% | 7.4% | 4.6% | 5.9% | 1.3% | 7.5% | 6.3% | 4.8% | 2.0% | 3.4% | 6.7% |
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 | 1.24 | 1.24 | 1.18 | 1.14 | 1.07 | 0.97 | 0.84 | 0.79 | 0.49 | 0.48 | 0.00 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 7.14 | 7.14 | 11.72 | 10.04 | 39.65 | 7.23 | 8.32 | 10.86 | 0.00 | 14.99 | 0.00 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 1.23 | 1.17 | 1.13 | 1.06 | 0.95 | 0.84 | 0.78 | 0.46 | 0.45 | -0.02 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 7.10 | 7.10 | 11.58 | 9.95 | 39.26 | 7.11 | 8.29 | 10.71 | 0.00 | 14.07 | -0.41 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 11.63 | 10.46 | 13.54 | 11.10 | 21.82 | — | 10.75 | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | — | — | 1.27 | 1.53 | 0.57 | 5.40 | 4.13 | 2.46 | 1.11 | 2.16 | 6.14 |
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 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 1.44 | 0.84 | 1.01 | 1.44 | 0.95 | 0.99 | 1.10 | 999999.00 | 1.99 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.14 | 0.14 | 1.44 | 0.84 | 1.01 | 1.44 | 0.95 | 0.99 | 1.10 | 999999.00 | 1.99 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.26 | 0.30 | 0.18 | 0.31 | 0.09 | 0.26 | 1.02 | 1.50 | 1.33 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.07 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | 19.5% | 13.0% | 10.6% | 10.3% | 14.0% | 9.5% | 10.6% | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | 196.5% | 196.5% | — | — | — | — | 78.0% | — | 166.2% | 91.1% | 45.6% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | 6.6% | 10.4% | 13.4% | 3.9% | 16.7% | 13.6% | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 16.9% | 14.4% | 11.6% | 9.9% | 14.8% | 5.7% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.4% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.5% | — | — | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 19.9% | 13.3% | 10.6% | 10.3% | 14.0% | 9.5% | 11.1% | — | — | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $37M | $37M | $36M | $31M | $28M | $28M | $28M | $30M | $30M | $6M |
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 CCAP stock.
Crescent Capital BDC, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -109.1x. The historical average is 11.9x.
Crescent Capital BDC, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 18.0x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 23.5x.
Crescent Capital BDC, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 4.8%. The historical average is 6.3%.
Based on historical data, Crescent Capital BDC, Inc. is trading at a P/E of -109.1x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Crescent Capital BDC, Inc.'s current dividend yield is 19.52% with a payout ratio of 196.5%.
Crescent Capital BDC, Inc. has 78.0% gross margin and 76.1% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Crescent Capital BDC, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 7.1x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Negative NIM against debt-weighted funding
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Deep Discount to Tangible Book Signals Impairment Pricing
CCAP trades at 0.46x book versus a tangible book value per share of $17.81 against a $8.70 share price, implying the market discounts reported book by roughly half, while the 21.0% dividend yield suggests investors are positioning for a distribution reset rather than crediting it.
The price-to-tangible-book discount of this magnitude, materially wider than peers such as ARCC at 0.91x and GBDC at 0.81x, is not consistent with a market that trusts the carrying value of a $1.6 billion portfolio which posted six quarters of nil provisions before reserves resumed in 2026. Investors should read the discount as an expectation that realizable values sit below carried values, and that the 9.35x trailing and 5.87x forward P/E multiples flatter a shrinking, potentially trough-level earnings base rather than a normalized one.
ROE Inverts as Margin and Fees Simultaneously Break
CCAP's ROE collapsed from 3.7% in 2024Q1 to -0.5% in 2026Q2, per its reported ten-quarter series, and DuPont decomposition attributes this primarily to the NIM inversion to -0.9% rather than to leverage, which remained broadly stable at roughly 2.4x assets-to-equity throughout.
With equity-to-assets drifting only from 0.46 to 0.41 while ROA swung from 1.7% to -0.2%, the profitability driver is unambiguously the earnings spread, not the capital structure; this matters because leverage-driven ROE can be repaired by retaining capital, whereas a negative spread cannot. The negative non-interest income line, which swung nearly $33 million between 2025Q1 and 2026Q2, further means the reported ROE reflects mark-to-market noise layered on a core engine that has stopped generating spread income, weakening confidence in any near-term mean reversion to the 2-3% ROE band seen in 2024.
Margin Inversion With Uninterpretable Efficiency Noise
NIM compressed from 1.9% in 2024Q1 to -0.9% in 2026Q2, the first negative reading in the series, indicating that funding costs now exceed asset yields; meanwhile the efficiency ratio printed values from -41.3% to 177.5% because negative fee revenue distorts the denominator.
The structural signal is the funding-cost squeeze arriving as liabilities expanded 10.8% to $962.4 million against a flat asset base, meaning the debt-weighted stack repriced faster than the loan book could. Analysts should disregard the efficiency ratio entirely for CCAP: with non-interest income predominantly negative, the ratio measures accounting noise from unrealized marks rather than operating cost discipline, and any peer comparison on that metric would be spurious.
Reserve Hiatus Ends as Credit Signals Turn
After six consecutive quarters of nil loan loss provisions from 2024Q1 through 2025Q2, CCAP recorded provisions of $7.3 million and $8.6 million in 2026Q1 and 2026Q2, per its recent SEC filings, a $15.9 million semiannual build that appears to acknowledge previously unreserved deterioration.
The timing is analytically significant: reserve levels were held flat through a period when non-interest income was printing negative marks, suggesting the earlier provisioning stance may have been optimistic relative to portfolio credit performance now recognized. Whether $15.9 million is adequate against a $1.6 billion portfolio warrants further investigation into disclosed non-accrual and watch-list trends, since the resumption of provisions without a corresponding recovery in NIM implies credit cost is rising into a contracting spread environment.
Widest Book Discount in the Coverage Group
CCAP's 0.46x P/B sits below every covered peer except MFIC-adjacent names, versus ARCC at 0.91x and GBDC at 0.81x, while its negative 2026 ROE contrasts with ARCC's 6.8% and GBDC's 3.8%, placing CCAP at the distressed end of the BDC comparison set.
Part of the gap is cyclical — the entire group faces floating-rate repricing and rising credit costs — but the persistence of CCAP's discount across the full ten-quarter window, including during 2024 when ROE reached 3.7%, suggests the market assigns a structural discount, plausibly reflecting the concentration risk or credit-mix questions that surface in its mark volatility. Its 21.0% yield exceeds every peer but TPVG and MFIC, yet distributions of $190.8 million against $89.5 million of retained ten-quarter earnings indicate the payout is not covered by earnings anywhere in the group comparison, so the yield gap may reflect risk pricing rather than relative quality.
Cheap P/E Is the Trap Ratio Here
The most misapplied ratio for CCAP is its 9.35x trailing P/E, which screens as a discount to peers but derives from earnings depressed by a negative NIM print and $15.9 million of newly resumed provisions, making the multiple an artifact of a collapsing denominator rather than evidence of value.
Forward P/E of 5.87x compounds the distortion, since it requires a recovery in net interest income that the current liability stack does not mechanically support; a shrinking earnings base makes any P/E look optically cheap. The appropriate lenses are price-to-tangible-book, adjusted for whether the $17.81 per share carrying value survives realistic credit marks, and dividend coverage against retained earnings, which at a 2.1x cumulative shortfall flags that distributions may be funded partly by asset sales. Notably, bank-style capital adequacy ratios such as CET1 are not disclosed for CCAP as a BDC, so equity-to-assets of 0.41, itself down from 0.46, is the closest available proxy for loss-absorbing capacity and shows the buffer thinning.