Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -157.2x · EV/EBITDA N/A · ROE -28.0%. (2019–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $820M | $1.2B | $618M | $704M | $373M | $680M | $1.4B | — |
| Enterprise Value | $813M | $1.2B | $607M | $638M | $174M | $382M | $1.4B | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -157.24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 4.78 | 8.26 | 5.95 | 8.76 | 7.07 | 29.05 | 297.60 | — |
| P/B Ratio | 6.43 | 10.10 | 5.26 | 4.81 | 1.64 | 2.34 | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 43.93 | 64.59 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 8.22 | 5.85 | 7.94 | 3.31 | 16.33 | 300.13 | — |
| EV / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 51.6% | 51.6% | 57.1% | 42.1% | 2.7% | 17.2% | 26.9% | 9.4% |
| Operating Margin | -30.7% | -30.7% | -79.2% | -109.8% | -195.3% | -228.3% | -562.1% | -314.7% |
| Net Profit Margin | -22.7% | -22.7% | -52.0% | -132.1% | -164.6% | -46.5% | -572.5% | -339.7% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -28.0% | -28.0% | -40.9% | -56.9% | -33.6% | -7.7% | — | — |
| ROA | -11.6% | -11.6% | -19.1% | -32.9% | -24.4% | -5.7% | -119.7% | -81.4% |
| ROIC | -30.7% | -30.7% | -66.1% | -121.0% | -714.3% | — | — | — |
| ROCE | -25.4% | -25.4% | -42.4% | -34.9% | -32.8% | -30.7% | -221.3% | -122.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.22 | 0.01 | 0.14 | 0.03 | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.06 | -0.10 | -0.45 | -0.87 | -1.03 | — | — |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | -18.10 | -18.10 | — | -161.39 | -120.90 | -0.79 | -62.70 | -24.49 |
Net cash position: cash ($49M) exceeds total debt ($42M)
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 1.23 | 1.23 | 1.26 | 2.14 | 4.95 | 13.61 | 0.85 | 2.18 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.15 | 1.15 | 1.08 | 2.03 | 4.78 | 13.49 | 0.62 | 2.03 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.56 | 0.56 | 0.54 | 1.45 | 3.89 | 12.65 | 0.39 | 1.86 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.48 | 0.39 | 0.27 | 0.15 | 0.06 | 0.22 | 0.24 |
| Inventory Turnover | 7.58 | 7.58 | 2.63 | 4.90 | 5.00 | 6.70 | 1.27 | 3.90 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 117.73 | 102.58 | 119.45 | 240.74 | 123.83 | 106.87 | 61.44 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $168M | $157M | $149M | $144M | $152M | $142M | $142M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 7 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 EVLV stock.
Evolv Technologies Holdings, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -157.2x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Evolv Technologies Holdings, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -28.0%. The historical average is -33.4%.
Based on historical data, Evolv Technologies Holdings, Inc. is trading at a P/E of -157.2x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Evolv Technologies Holdings, Inc. has 51.6% gross margin and -30.7% operating margin.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Cash runway and efficacy concerns
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Gross Margin Compression Masks Underlying Mix Shift
Gross margin fell to 50.2% in 2026Q2 from 59.8% in 2025Q1, reflecting a mix shift toward lower-margin hardware and service costs, while operating margin improved to -24.1% from -53.8% a year earlier, per reported financials.
The sequential gross margin decline of nearly 10 percentage points over five quarters suggests that the revenue mix is becoming more hardware-heavy or that service costs are scaling with the installed base. Operating margin improvement, though still deeply negative, indicates that SG&A leverage is beginning to materialize as revenue grows. Investors should monitor whether gross margin stabilizes above 50% as subscription revenue becomes a larger share, since that is the primary lever for reaching profitability.
ROIC Remains Deeply Negative but Losses Narrow
ROIC improved to -7.4% in 2026Q2 from -18.2% in 2024Q1, according to the latest quarterly data, indicating that capital efficiency is recovering as revenue scales, though returns remain far below the cost of capital.
The improvement in ROIC is driven by a combination of higher asset turnover (0.14x vs 0.08x in 2024Q1) and narrowing operating losses, but the absolute level still implies significant value destruction on invested capital. The asset base is increasingly weighted toward deployed hardware (PP&E at 46.5% of assets), which may limit ROIC expansion unless subscription revenue grows without proportional capital intensity. The trend suggests that the company is moving in the right direction, but it will take several more quarters of margin expansion to approach a positive return on capital.
Working Capital Cycle Shortens as Collections Improve
Cash conversion cycle improved to 64 days in 2026Q2 from 206 days in 2024Q3, driven by a drop in DSO to 89 days from 124 days, based on reported figures, indicating better receivables management and a shift toward subscription billing.
The dramatic reduction in DSO suggests that the company is collecting cash faster, likely due to a higher proportion of upfront subscription payments or improved collections processes. DPO also increased to 61 days from 57 days, providing a modest source of financing. However, the CCC remains elevated relative to software peers, reflecting the hardware component of the business. The improvement in working capital efficiency is a positive sign for cash generation, but it may not be sustainable as the mix shifts back toward hardware deployments.
Debt Levels Rise but Coverage Remains Thin
Debt-to-equity rose to 0.35 in 2026Q2 from 0.02 in 2024Q1, while interest coverage turned negative at -10.93, according to the latest balance sheet data, indicating that the company's debt service is increasingly reliant on external funding.
The increase in debt is modest in absolute terms ($41.6M), but the negative interest coverage ratio suggests that operating income is insufficient to cover interest expenses, a common situation for growth-stage companies. The low D/E relative to peers like OSIS (0.72) provides some cushion, but the company's cash balance of $49M limits its ability to absorb additional leverage. Investors should monitor whether the company can generate positive operating income before refinancing needs arise, as a capital raise may be necessary to fund operations beyond the next 18-24 months.
Liquidity Cushion Thins as Current Ratio Declines
Current ratio fell to 1.18 in 2026Q2 from 1.77 in 2024Q1, while quick ratio held at 1.11, based on quarterly data, indicating a shrinking liquidity buffer that may strain under stress scenarios.
The decline in the current ratio is driven by a combination of rising current liabilities (likely deferred revenue and payables) and a relatively stable current asset base. The quick ratio of 1.11 suggests that inventory is not a major liquidity concern, but the thin margin above 1.0 leaves little room for error. If revenue growth slows or collections deteriorate, the company could face short-term liquidity pressure, especially given its limited cash runway. The stabilization of cash at $49M provides a temporary buffer, but the trend warrants close monitoring.
P/S Multiple Misapplied to Hardware-Enabled SaaS
The price-to-sales ratio of 7.43, as reported in current valuation data, is often used to justify a SaaS-like multiple, but it obscures the capital intensity and negative margins of Evolv's hybrid model, which may warrant a lower multiple.
Investors commonly apply a SaaS multiple to Evolv due to its recurring revenue ambitions, but the company's asset-heavy model (PP&E at 46.5% of assets) and negative operating margins suggest that EV/Sales or EV/EBITDA may be more appropriate. The P/S ratio does not account for the significant capital expenditures required to deploy hardware, nor does it reflect the dilution from stock-based compensation. A more accurate valuation approach would adjust for the hardware component by using EV/EBITDA (when positive) or a discounted cash flow model that captures the transition to a subscription model. Until the company demonstrates sustainable operating leverage, the P/S multiple may overstate its value relative to traditional security hardware peers.