Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 26.2x · EV/EBITDA 10.7x · ROE 3.5%. (2001–2025 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 | $356M | $183M | $233M | $303M | $325M | $330M | $166M | $296M | $333M | $390M | $243M |
| Enterprise Value | $870M | $697M | $746M | $844M | $912M | $627M | $504M | $664M | $737M | $951M | $743M |
| P/E Ratio → | 26.18 | 15.09 | 33.33 | 6.91 | 2.87 | 6.38 | — | 28.27 | 4.97 | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 1.67 | 0.86 | 1.02 | 1.15 | 1.12 | 1.54 | 0.98 | 1.34 | 1.47 | 2.41 | 2.13 |
| P/B Ratio | 0.63 | 0.37 | 0.46 | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.84 | 0.39 | 0.52 | 0.53 | 0.62 | 0.23 |
| P/FCF | 8.03 | 4.14 | 3.92 | 7.83 | — | 4.67 | 14.98 | 6.31 | 4.32 | — | — |
| P/OCF | 7.49 | 3.86 | 2.78 | 4.30 | 2.05 | 3.68 | 9.65 | 5.93 | 4.17 | 16.64 | — |
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 | — | 3.27 | 3.27 | 3.22 | 3.14 | 2.93 | 2.97 | 3.01 | 3.26 | 5.87 | 6.50 |
| EV / EBITDA | 10.66 | 8.54 | 7.19 | 6.23 | 4.90 | 6.03 | 14.16 | 16.99 | 15.18 | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 20.61 | 18.10 | 14.07 | 10.50 | 6.61 | 10.09 | — | 38.08 | 16.42 | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 15.73 | 12.57 | 21.84 | — | 8.87 | 45.40 | 14.14 | 9.55 | — | — |
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 | 56.6% | 56.6% | 57.8% | 43.2% | 57.8% | 43.6% | 16.1% | 30.7% | 31.4% | -14.9% | -58.7% |
| Operating Margin | 19.8% | 19.8% | 25.8% | 32.7% | 49.2% | 29.7% | -4.4% | -4.5% | -1.6% | -298.9% | -77.3% |
| Net Profit Margin | 8.3% | 8.3% | 5.6% | 19.0% | 41.1% | 26.8% | -79.1% | -4.8% | 29.8% | -316.1% | -143.7% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 3.5% | 3.5% | 2.6% | 10.2% | 27.0% | 14.0% | -26.9% | -1.8% | 10.8% | -60.9% | -14.4% |
| ROA | 1.5% | 1.5% | 1.1% | 4.2% | 11.8% | 6.7% | -13.8% | -0.9% | 5.5% | -35.1% | -9.4% |
| ROIC | 3.1% | 3.1% | 4.3% | 6.1% | 12.1% | 6.5% | -0.7% | -0.8% | -0.2% | -26.5% | -4.1% |
| ROCE | 3.6% | 3.6% | 5.4% | 8.0% | 15.6% | 8.0% | -0.8% | -1.0% | -0.3% | -35.1% | -5.2% |
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 | 1.27 | 1.27 | 1.26 | 1.31 | 1.36 | 1.08 | 0.98 | 0.83 | 0.85 | 0.96 | 0.57 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 7.80 | 7.80 | 6.15 | 4.74 | 3.57 | 4.07 | 11.82 | 12.16 | 10.93 | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 1.02 | 1.02 | 1.11 | 1.20 | 0.75 | 0.79 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.90 | 0.47 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 6.30 | 6.30 | 4.95 | 3.99 | 3.16 | 2.85 | 9.49 | 9.41 | 8.32 | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | 11.59 | 8.65 | 14.00 | — | 4.20 | 30.41 | 7.83 | 5.24 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 0.90 | 0.90 | 1.18 | 1.63 | 5.04 | 3.07 | -5.16 | 0.59 | 1.47 | -18.28 | -6.59 |
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 | — | — | 2.58 | 2.14 | 1.23 | 2.19 | 2.02 | 2.09 | 1.13 | 1.73 | 1.47 |
| Quick Ratio | — | — | 2.52 | 2.08 | 1.19 | 2.09 | 1.95 | 2.01 | 1.09 | 1.65 | 1.40 |
| Cash Ratio | — | — | 2.35 | 1.91 | 0.93 | 1.95 | 1.35 | 1.64 | 1.01 | 0.50 | 1.25 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.18 | 0.19 | 0.22 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.13 | 0.07 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | 22.94 | 29.45 | 26.91 | 19.84 | 30.18 | 27.70 | 26.58 | 32.23 | 30.95 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | — | 10.81 | 8.38 | 7.98 | 6.45 | 13.83 | 13.04 | 4.76 | 197.49 | 19.18 |
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 | 1.5% | 2.5% | 12.5% | 13.7% | 24.6% | 2.7% | 3.5% | 1.9% | 1.7% | 1.5% | 2.4% |
| Payout Ratio | 26.0% | 26.0% | 227.6% | 83.1% | 67.0% | 15.4% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 3.8% | 6.6% | 3.0% | 14.5% | 34.9% | 15.7% | — | 3.5% | 20.1% | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 12.5% | 24.2% | 25.5% | 12.8% | — | 21.4% | 6.7% | 15.9% | 23.2% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 6.5% | 12.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.2% | 13.7% | 7.2% | 16.8% | 4.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 7.9% | 15.1% | 12.5% | 13.7% | 25.7% | 16.4% | 10.7% | 18.7% | 6.3% | 1.5% | 2.4% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $110M | $119M | $102M | $83M | $85M | $86M | $95M | $105M | $96M | $80M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 25 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 DSX stock.
Diana Shipping Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 26.2x. The historical average is 11.2x. This places it at the 87th percentile of its historical range.
Diana Shipping Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 10.7x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 10.4x.
Diana Shipping Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 3.5%. The historical average is 9.4%.
Based on historical data, Diana Shipping Inc. is trading at a P/E of 26.2x. This is at the 87th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Diana Shipping Inc.'s current dividend yield is 1.45% with a payout ratio of 26.0%.
Diana Shipping Inc. has 56.6% gross margin and 19.8% operating margin. Operating margin between 10-20% is typical for established companies.
Diana Shipping Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 7.8x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Cyclical Charter Rate Volatility
Market Pricing Reflects Structural Stagnation
According to current market data, Diana Shipping trades at a forward P/E of 5.19 and a P/B of 0.45, suggesting that investors are heavily discounting the company's future earnings potential relative to its historical book value and the broader dry bulk shipping peer group.
The significant discount to book value indicates that the market remains skeptical of the company's ability to generate returns above its cost of capital in the current cycle. While the low forward P/E might appear attractive, it likely reflects a market expectation of declining earnings rather than an undervalued growth opportunity.
Capital Efficiency Remains Subdued Historically
Based on reported financial figures, Diana Shipping's ROIC has struggled to maintain momentum, hovering between 0.5% and 1.4% over the last ten quarters, which highlights a persistent inability to compound capital effectively within the capital-intensive dry bulk shipping industry compared to more efficient peers.
The low ROIC suggests that the company's asset base is not generating sufficient incremental returns to justify further aggressive capital expenditure. Investors should monitor whether management can improve these returns through fleet optimization or if the current structural headwinds will continue to suppress capital efficiency.
Working Capital Dynamics Lack Visibility
As reported in quarterly filings, Diana Shipping's asset turnover remains consistently low at approximately 0.04 to 0.05, reflecting the high capital intensity of the fleet and the inherent difficulty in accelerating revenue generation without significant expansion of the vessel portfolio or improved charter rates.
The lack of consistent data regarding the cash conversion cycle makes it difficult to assess the company's operational agility in managing its receivables and payables. This opacity warrants further investigation into whether the company is effectively leveraging its relationships with charterers to optimize its working capital position.
Conservative Leverage Supports Financial Stability
Based on recent financial statements, Diana Shipping maintains a stable debt-to-equity ratio of 1.27, which provides a defensive buffer against interest rate volatility and distinguishes the company from more highly leveraged competitors within the volatile marine shipping sector during periods of market downturn.
While the debt-to-equity ratio appears manageable, the interest coverage ratio, which has fluctuated between 0.76 and 1.74, suggests that the company's ability to service its debt remains sensitive to earnings volatility. This indicates that while the balance sheet is not currently overextended, the margin for error remains narrow.
Misapplication of P/E Multiples Locally
The P/E ratio is frequently misapplied to Diana Shipping, as it fails to account for the significant non-cash depreciation charges and the cyclical nature of charter contracts that distort short-term earnings, making EV/EBITDA a more reliable metric for assessing the company's true operational value.
Using P/E ignores the capital-intensive nature of the business and the timing differences in revenue recognition across the charter ladder. Analysts should prioritize EV/EBITDA to better normalize for the company's capital structure and the underlying cash-generating capacity of the dry bulk fleet.