Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 16.4x · EV/EBITDA 15.5x · ROE 8.4%. (2003–2026 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $652M | $385M | $608M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $698M | $431M | $656M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 16.39 | 9.63 | 11.80 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 1.12 | 0.66 | 0.99 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 1.39 | 0.82 | 1.26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | 12.42 | 7.33 | 12064.26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 12.42 | 7.33 | 9854.76 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 0.74 | 1.07 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 15.52 | 9.58 | 10.57 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 15.52 | — | 9.50 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 8.22 | 13006.48 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 61.2% | 61.2% | 60.5% | 60.8% | 60.7% | 59.3% | 57.4% | 54.8% | 54.8% | 54.2% | 55.0% |
| Operating Margin | 7.8% | 7.8% | 10.1% | 12.1% | 16.9% | 16.4% | 11.6% | 2.0% | 7.0% | 6.4% | 7.6% |
| Net Profit Margin | 6.9% | 6.9% | 8.4% | 9.9% | 13.4% | 12.6% | 8.8% | 1.5% | 3.4% | 4.7% | 4.7% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 8.4% | 8.4% | 10.7% | 13.4% | 24.1% | 27.2% | 17.7% | 2.6% | 6.9% | 9.3% | 9.1% |
| ROA | 5.5% | 5.5% | 7.0% | 8.6% | 14.4% | 14.7% | 9.2% | 1.6% | 4.9% | 6.6% | 6.3% |
| ROIC | 5.6% | 5.6% | 7.6% | 9.9% | 18.7% | 21.2% | 12.8% | 2.1% | 10.5% | 9.2% | 10.2% |
| ROCE | 7.8% | 7.8% | 10.5% | 13.3% | 24.6% | 27.8% | 16.9% | 2.7% | 13.2% | 11.5% | 12.9% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.27 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.28 | 0.46 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.04 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 2.67 | 2.67 | 1.99 | 1.37 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 1.03 | 5.34 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.18 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 0.09 | -0.05 | -0.02 | 0.24 | -0.06 | -0.06 | -0.11 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 1.04 | 1.04 | 0.77 | 0.62 | 0.28 | -0.13 | -0.06 | 2.81 | -0.28 | -0.31 | -0.56 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 0.89 | 942.22 | 0.83 | 0.49 | -0.35 | -0.05 | 2.16 | -0.44 | -0.71 | -0.71 |
| Interest Coverage | — | — | — | — | — | — | 159.86 | 32.18 | 390.20 | 151.98 | 47.60 |
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 2.06 | 2.06 | 2.03 | 2.16 | 2.20 | 1.61 | 1.32 | 1.65 | 1.76 | 1.77 | 1.92 |
| Quick Ratio | 2.06 | 2.06 | 2.03 | 2.16 | 2.20 | 1.61 | 1.32 | 1.65 | 1.76 | 1.77 | 1.92 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.45 | 0.38 | 0.51 | 0.47 | 0.52 | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.46 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.81 | 0.83 | 0.87 | 1.06 | 1.14 | 1.00 | 0.95 | 1.46 | 1.45 | 1.34 |
| 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 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | 0.1% | 78.8% | 43.8% | 46.7% | 72.1% | 241.2% | 182.9% | 81.1% | 55.3% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 6.1% | 10.4% | 8.5% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 8.1% | 13.6% | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $26M | $26M | $51M | $51M | $51M | $51M | $52M | $54M | $55M | $56M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 24 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 ETH stock.
Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust ETF's current P/E ratio is 16.4x. The historical average is 10.7x. This places it at the 100th percentile of its historical range.
Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust ETF's current EV/EBITDA is 15.5x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 10.1x.
Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust ETF's return on equity (ROE) is 8.4%. The historical average is 11.3%.
Based on historical data, Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust ETF is trading at a P/E of 16.4x. This is at the 100th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust ETF has 61.2% gross margin and 7.8% operating margin.
Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust ETF's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 2.7x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Persistent provision expense drag
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Extreme Premium to Tangible Book Value
The trust trades at a P/B of 18.49 and a P/TBV of 1.39, as reported in recent financial statements, implying the market assigns significant value to intangible assets or future earnings potential far beyond the current tangible equity base.
The P/B multiple of 18.49 is exceptionally high for a financial institution, suggesting the market is pricing the trust not as a traditional balance sheet but as a vehicle for exposure to its underlying Ethereum holdings or fee-generating capacity. The P/TBV ratio of 1.39 indicates that tangible book value accounts for only a fraction of the market capitalization, with the premium likely reflecting the value of the trust structure, brand, and management franchise rather than traditional banking assets.
ROE Constrained by Provision Burden
ROE has averaged approximately 2.2% over the last ten quarters, with a peak of 3.7% in 2024Q2, indicating that profitability is severely limited by the persistent loan loss provisions that consume a substantial portion of fee revenue.
The DuPont decomposition reveals a unique profile: with NIM effectively zero, ROE is driven entirely by fee income and leverage, but the high efficiency ratio (averaging ~52%) and significant provision expense act as major drags. The modest ROE relative to the high P/B multiple suggests the market is either anticipating a significant improvement in profitability or is valuing the trust on metrics other than current earnings generation.
Provision Burden Outpaces Earnings Capacity
Loan loss provisions have consistently ranged from $50.6M to $66.6M per quarter, consuming 35-40% of total revenue and representing a 4.6x multiple of net income in 2026Q4, as per the income statement analysis.
The persistent and elevated provision expense is the primary constraint on the trust's financial performance. This level of provisioning suggests either a deteriorating credit portfolio or a proactive, conservative reserve-building strategy. The fact that provisions consistently exceed net income indicates that the trust is not generating sufficient earnings to absorb these costs organically, which pressures capital and limits the capacity for shareholder returns.
Equity Buffer Eroding Under Provision Pressure
The equity-to-assets ratio has declined from 0.77 in 2025Q1 to 0.65 in 2026Q4, reflecting a steady erosion of the capital buffer as cumulative provisions outpace retained earnings, based on balance sheet data.
While the current equity-to-assets ratio of 0.65 appears adequate in isolation, the downward trend is a concern. The erosion is driven by the persistent provision expense, which is consuming capital faster than it can be generated through retained earnings. This trajectory, if continued, could eventually constrain the trust's operational flexibility and ability to absorb further losses without raising external capital.
P/B Multiple Misapplied to Non-Bank Structure
The P/B ratio of 18.49 is the most commonly misapplied metric, as it compares a market capitalization driven by crypto-asset exposure to a tangible book value derived from a traditional financial statement, obscuring the trust's true economic drivers.
Investors often use P/B to value banks, but for this trust, the metric is misleading. The tangible book value is a function of accounting rules for a financial vehicle, while the market price is overwhelmingly driven by the value of the underlying Ethereum and market sentiment. A more appropriate analysis would focus on the trust's fee revenue relative to assets under management and the sustainability of its cost structure, rather than the relationship between market price and accounting equity.