Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 74.5x · EV/EBITDA 33.1x · ROE 10.5%. (2018–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $78.3B | $99.6B | $72.2B | $38.9B | $18.1B | $50.2B | $8.9B | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $77.2B | $98.5B | $68.7B | $36.7B | $16.7B | $48.1B | $5.2B | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 74.49 | 106.33 | 578.45 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 4.59 | 7.26 | 6.73 | 4.50 | 2.75 | 10.26 | 3.09 | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 7.86 | 9.91 | 9.24 | 5.70 | 2.68 | 10.75 | 1.89 | — | — |
| P/FCF | 31.81 | 45.81 | 40.05 | 28.81 | 863.45 | 110.23 | 95.77 | — | — |
| P/OCF | 32.20 | 40.96 | 33.85 | 23.23 | 49.41 | 72.48 | 35.34 | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 7.18 | 6.41 | 4.25 | 2.53 | 9.83 | 1.79 | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 33.08 | 67.00 | 131.34 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 106.77 | 104.56 | 440.32 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 45.30 | 38.12 | 27.22 | 793.64 | 105.61 | 55.68 | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 50.9% | 50.9% | 48.3% | 46.9% | 45.5% | 52.2% | 52.6% | 40.9% | 21.6% |
| Operating Margin | 5.3% | 5.3% | -0.4% | -6.7% | -17.1% | -9.2% | -15.1% | -69.6% | -72.2% |
| Net Profit Margin | 6.8% | 6.8% | 1.1% | -6.5% | -20.7% | -9.6% | -16.0% | -75.4% | -70.1% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 10.5% | 10.5% | 1.7% | -8.2% | -23.9% | -10.0% | -15.7% | -77.1% | -37.2% |
| ROA | 5.8% | 5.8% | 1.0% | -5.4% | -16.4% | -7.1% | -11.4% | -55.2% | -29.9% |
| ROIC | 8.2% | 8.2% | -0.6% | -8.7% | -21.4% | -19.2% | -31.4% | -64.0% | — |
| ROCE | 6.6% | 6.6% | -0.5% | -7.9% | -18.3% | -9.0% | -13.8% | -64.1% | -36.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.13 | 0.16 | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | 2.24 | 2.24 | 1.02 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.11 | -0.45 | -0.31 | -0.22 | -0.45 | -0.79 | -0.06 | -0.39 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | -0.74 | -0.74 | -6.66 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | -0.50 | -1.93 | -1.58 | -69.81 | -4.63 | -40.09 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | — | — | — | — | -516.00 | -32.07 | -13.31 | — | -203.00 |
Net cash position: cash ($4.4B) exceeds total debt ($3.3B)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 1.41 | 1.41 | 1.66 | 1.64 | 1.86 | 2.59 | 3.94 | 2.61 | 5.17 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.41 | 1.41 | 1.66 | 1.64 | 1.86 | 2.59 | 3.94 | 2.61 | 5.17 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.90 | 0.90 | 1.20 | 1.20 | 1.38 | 2.13 | 3.47 | 2.00 | 4.27 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.70 | 0.83 | 0.80 | 0.67 | 0.72 | 0.45 | 0.51 | 0.43 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 36.91 | 29.45 | 29.42 | 22.18 | 26.06 | 36.80 | 23.92 | 23.83 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 1.3% | 0.9% | 0.2% | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 3.1% | 2.2% | 2.5% | 3.5% | 0.1% | 0.9% | 1.0% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 1.9% | 2.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 1.9% | 2.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $440M | $430M | $393M | $371M | $337M | $62M | $43M | $44M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 8 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 DASH stock.
DoorDash, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 74.5x. The historical average is 106.3x.
DoorDash, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 33.1x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 67.0x.
DoorDash, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 10.5%. The historical average is -20.0%.
Based on historical data, DoorDash, Inc. is trading at a P/E of 74.5x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
DoorDash, Inc. has 50.9% gross margin and 5.3% operating margin.
DoorDash, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 2.2x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Labor cost and classification exposure
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Premium Multiples Price in Sustained Growth
Based on DASH's reported figures, the trailing P/E of 84.35 and EV/EBITDA of 52.52 sit far above Uber at roughly 14.5x earnings and 22.9x EBITDA, implying the market is capitalizing a long runway of margin expansion that current profitability has not yet demonstrated.
The forward P/E of 64.72 and forward EV/EBITDA of 34.11 still embed a substantial premium, suggesting investors are underwriting continued revenue growth near 28% and meaningful operating leverage. Compared with Maplebear at 36.3x trailing earnings, DASH appears priced as a platform compounder rather than a logistics operator, a framing that warrants scrutiny given operating margin of only 9.6%. Investors should monitor whether margin progress keeps pace with the multiple, since any slowdown in top-line momentum would leave limited room for multiple support.
Gross Margin Gains Outpace Operating Conversion
As reported in financial statements, DASH gross margin rose from 47.3% in 2024Q2 to 53.0% in 2026Q3, yet operating margin reached only 9.6%, indicating that roughly 43 points of gross profit is still absorbed by fulfillment, marketing, and personnel costs.
The widening gap between gross and operating margin suggests that the take-rate improvement is being reinvested into delivery density, promotions, and technology rather than dropping through to earnings. Operating margin dipped from 10.1% in 2026Q2 to 9.6% in 2026Q3 despite gross margin rising, which may indicate rising cost pressure or heavier marketing spend in the latest quarter. Net margin of 10.1% exceeding operating margin points to non-operating contributions, such as interest income on the cash base, that may flatter bottom-line optics and should be stripped out when judging true earning power.
Returns Recovering From Near-Zero Base
According to reported quarterly figures, DASH ROIC climbed from a negative 3.5% in 2024Q2 to 3.7% in 2026Q3, with ROE of 4.5% in the latest quarter, a level that remains modest for an asset-light model.
The improvement in ROIC appears driven primarily by margin recovery rather than capital efficiency, since asset turnover of roughly 0.23 is low and largely unchanged. Returns remain well below the peer CART at 20.7% ROIC and UBER at 13.8%, suggesting that DASH has not yet converted its scale into superior capital returns. The trajectory is directionally positive, but investors should judge whether returns can reach double digits before treating the compounding thesis as validated.
Debt Step-Up Shifts Capital Structure
Based on DASH's reported figures, D/E rose from 0.06 in 2025Q1 to 0.31 in 2026Q3 as total debt moved to roughly $3.3B, while interest coverage has not been reported, leaving debt service comfort difficult to confirm from the supplied ratios.
Debt-to-EBITDA of around 4.4x in the latest quarter, down from above 7x earlier, suggests leverage is falling as EBITDA scales, though the level still warrants attention for a business with thin operating margins. The absence of reported interest coverage means the cost of the new debt against operating earnings cannot be verified from this data. Refinancing terms and maturity profile would be the next items to examine before concluding that the capital structure is comfortable.
Working Capital Cushion Remains Adequate
As reported in financial statements, DASH current ratio eased from 2.07 in 2025Q2 to 1.46 in 2026Q3, with cash reserves of roughly $5.1B providing a meaningful buffer against near-term obligations even as the ratio compresses.
The decline in current ratio appears to reflect growth in current liabilities tied to merchant and Dasher settlements rather than deterioration in cash, since the cash balance still covers current obligations several times over. Quick ratio matching the current ratio indicates minimal inventory, consistent with a marketplace model. Under a severe stress scenario, the liquidity position would likely hold given the cash base, though sustained shrinkage in the ratio would warrant closer monitoring.
Misapplied Margin Metric Obscures Economics
Based on DASH's reported figures, gross margin near 53% is often cited as evidence of pricing power, yet it is a take-rate measure that excludes Dasher costs and promotions, which may overstate economic retention relative to contribution margin.
Gross margin for a marketplace reflects net revenue after certain pass-through and incentive treatments, so its level depends heavily on accounting presentation rather than purely on economic value captured. A contribution margin per order, net of Dasher pay, insurance, and promotions, would better isolate whether unit economics improve with scale. Investors should monitor that adjusted measure alongside reported gross margin before inferring durable pricing power from the headline figure.