Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 38.8x · EV/EBITDA 24.5x · ROE 11.3%. (2004–2025 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 | $38.7B | $46.5B | $30.7B | $25.8B | $18.2B | $20.1B | $20.6B | $21.8B | $15.9B | $16.5B | $13.6B |
| Enterprise Value | $46.0B | $53.0B | $37.4B | $32.6B | $25.0B | $25.4B | $23.9B | $25.9B | $20.2B | $20.5B | $18.4B |
| P/E Ratio → | 38.76 | 52.53 | 9.47 | 75.34 | 100.72 | 16.87 | — | 48.06 | — | 37.58 | 36.43 |
| P/S Ratio | 3.57 | 4.83 | 3.35 | 3.03 | 2.41 | 2.97 | 3.25 | 3.60 | 2.77 | 3.20 | 1.26 |
| P/B Ratio | 4.48 | 6.07 | 3.77 | 4.39 | 2.87 | 3.45 | 5.38 | 4.29 | 2.97 | 2.64 | 2.15 |
| P/FCF | 19.76 | 26.75 | 28.73 | 21.91 | 20.09 | 29.33 | 21.06 | 22.34 | 23.99 | 14.39 | 13.62 |
| P/OCF | 17.84 | 24.15 | 23.71 | 20.42 | 18.18 | 24.84 | 18.83 | 18.51 | 18.82 | 12.88 | 11.57 |
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 | — | 5.51 | 4.09 | 3.83 | 3.31 | 3.75 | 3.77 | 4.27 | 3.53 | 3.98 | 1.71 |
| EV / EBITDA | 24.51 | 31.80 | 10.53 | 31.77 | 34.57 | 14.52 | 56.66 | 44.50 | 35.75 | 27.21 | 14.52 |
| EV / EBIT | 34.71 | 35.15 | 9.12 | 30.27 | 40.13 | 20.44 | 138.21 | 30.78 | 37.96 | 26.75 | 18.02 |
| EV / FCF | — | 30.48 | 35.03 | 27.70 | 27.52 | 37.03 | 24.47 | 26.49 | 30.52 | 17.89 | 18.51 |
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 | 88.3% | 88.3% | 87.8% | 87.7% | 84.1% | 84.1% | 84.2% | 84.3% | 82.8% | 210.8% | 88.2% |
| Operating Margin | 12.2% | 12.2% | 34.0% | 7.3% | 5.6% | 21.8% | 3.0% | 6.6% | 7.6% | 12.4% | 8.6% |
| Net Profit Margin | 9.2% | 9.2% | 35.4% | 5.4% | 2.5% | 17.7% | -6.7% | 4.4% | -7.8% | 8.8% | 3.5% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 11.3% | 11.3% | 46.3% | 7.5% | 3.1% | 24.8% | -9.5% | 5.1% | -7.7% | 7.2% | 5.8% |
| ROA | 3.1% | 3.1% | 11.7% | 1.7% | 0.7% | 5.0% | -1.8% | 1.1% | -2.0% | 2.0% | 1.5% |
| ROIC | 6.1% | 6.1% | 16.9% | 3.6% | 2.6% | 12.1% | 1.7% | 3.2% | 3.3% | 4.5% | 6.1% |
| ROCE | 5.4% | 5.4% | 14.4% | 3.0% | 2.2% | 9.0% | 1.3% | 2.6% | 2.7% | 3.6% | 5.3% |
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 | 1.40 | 1.40 | 1.42 | 1.97 | 1.86 | 1.84 | 2.55 | 1.73 | 1.55 | 1.37 | 1.33 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 6.44 | 6.44 | 3.25 | 11.27 | 16.39 | 6.14 | 23.12 | 15.11 | 14.71 | 11.35 | 6.61 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.85 | 0.83 | 1.16 | 1.06 | 0.90 | 0.87 | 0.80 | 0.81 | 0.64 | 0.77 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 3.89 | 3.89 | 1.89 | 6.64 | 9.34 | 3.02 | 7.90 | 6.97 | 7.65 | 5.32 | 3.83 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 3.73 | 6.30 | 5.79 | 7.44 | 7.69 | 3.41 | 4.15 | 6.53 | 3.50 | 4.88 |
| Interest Coverage | 3.44 | 3.44 | 8.30 | 2.31 | 1.64 | 4.50 | 0.47 | 2.50 | 1.82 | 2.21 | 2.26 |
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 | 1.13 | 1.13 | 1.22 | 1.21 | 1.38 | 1.38 | 1.45 | 1.36 | 1.47 | 1.38 | 1.39 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.05 | 1.05 | 1.14 | 1.13 | 1.29 | 1.32 | 1.37 | 1.28 | 1.39 | 1.27 | 1.30 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.66 | 0.66 | 0.76 | 0.82 | 0.95 | 0.83 | 0.74 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.78 | 0.63 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.35 | 0.32 | 0.32 | 0.29 | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 0.46 |
| Inventory Turnover | 2.08 | 2.08 | 2.27 | 2.29 | 2.52 | 2.66 | 1.45 | 1.36 | 1.66 | 2.14 | 2.46 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 82.39 | 87.47 | 58.00 | 75.70 | 73.94 | 81.62 | 77.65 | 72.21 | 190.11 | 98.80 |
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 | 0.5% | 0.3% | 0.4% | 0.5% | 0.7% | 0.2% | 0.6% | 1.1% | 1.5% | 1.3% | 1.7% |
| Payout Ratio | 17.6% | 17.6% | 4.0% | 29.6% | 70.2% | 2.6% | — | 88.8% | — | 48.0% | 60.1% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 2.6% | 1.9% | 10.6% | 1.3% | 1.0% | 5.9% | — | 2.1% | — | 2.7% | 2.7% |
| FCF Yield | 5.1% | 3.7% | 3.5% | 4.6% | 5.0% | 3.4% | 4.7% | 4.5% | 4.2% | 6.9% | 7.3% |
| Buyback Yield | 1.5% | 1.1% | 3.2% | 0.4% | 2.4% | 2.1% | 1.2% | 1.3% | 1.8% | 1.8% | 2.3% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 1.9% | 1.4% | 3.6% | 1.0% | 3.2% | 2.3% | 1.8% | 2.4% | 3.3% | 3.2% | 4.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $720M | $729M | $728M | $723M | $732M | $732M | $732M | $809M | $731M | $759M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 21 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 FER stock.
Ferrovial SE's current P/E ratio is 38.8x. The historical average is 39.3x. This places it at the 67th percentile of its historical range.
Ferrovial SE's current EV/EBITDA is 24.5x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 26.9x.
Ferrovial SE's return on equity (ROE) is 11.3%. The historical average is 9.4%.
Based on historical data, Ferrovial SE is trading at a P/E of 38.8x. This is at the 67th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Ferrovial SE's current dividend yield is 0.45% with a payout ratio of 17.6%.
Ferrovial SE has 88.3% gross margin and 12.2% operating margin. Operating margin between 10-20% is typical for established companies.
Ferrovial SE's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 6.4x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Dynamic tolling regulatory caps
Margin Mix Masks Underlying Earnings Power
Gross margin expanded to 88.3% in 2026Q2, per reported financials, yet operating margin contracted to 11.0% from 15.8% a year earlier, suggesting concession revenue dominates but operating costs are rising.
The 88.3% gross margin reflects a revenue mix heavily weighted toward high-margin infrastructure concessions, where depreciation and financing costs are the primary expenses. However, the operating margin compression to 11.0% indicates that SG&A and construction segment overhead are absorbing incremental revenue, as seen in the 26.5% YoY decline in operating income. This divergence suggests that the true earning power lies in the toll road and airport concessions, which are partially equity-accounted and not fully reflected in the consolidated income statement. Investors should monitor whether operating margin stabilizes as project mix shifts toward higher-value managed lanes.
Return on Capital Compressed by Asset Base
ROIC fell to 1.4% in 2026Q2 from 6.4% in 2024Q4, per reported data, indicating that the expanded asset base from concession investments is not yet generating proportional returns.
The sharp decline in ROIC from 6.4% to 1.4% over the past six quarters suggests that the company is in a heavy investment phase, with capital deployed into North American managed lanes and energy infrastructure that have not yet reached full operational maturity. ROE also dropped from 17.4% to 1.7% in the same period, reflecting both lower net income and a stable equity base. This pattern is consistent with a capital-intensive model where returns are back-end loaded; however, the sustained low ROIC warrants monitoring to ensure that the expected cash flows from these concessions materialize as projected.
Negative Cash Conversion Cycle Signals Concession Strength
Cash conversion cycle improved to -304 days in 2026Q2, per financial statements, driven by DPO of 569 days, indicating the company is financing operations through supplier credit and concession prepayments.
The persistently negative CCC, ranging from -261 to -409 days over the past ten quarters, reflects the unique nature of concession accounting where large deferred revenue and long-term payables dominate working capital. DPO of 569 days is exceptionally high, suggesting that the company holds significant non-interest-bearing liabilities, likely related to concession obligations and construction retentions. This efficiency metric is not directly comparable to typical industrial peers, as it is distorted by the long-duration nature of infrastructure contracts. Nonetheless, the negative CCC indicates that working capital is a source of cash, supporting the strong FCF margin of 31.2% in 2026Q2.
Leverage Elevated but Largely Non-Recourse
Debt-to-equity rose to 1.44 in 2026Q2, per reported figures, up from 1.35 a year earlier, while interest coverage was 3.12x in 2025Q2, suggesting manageable debt service but limited balance-sheet flexibility.
The increase in D/E to 1.44 reflects continued borrowing to fund concession investments, but a substantial portion of this debt is likely non-recourse project finance, which does not expose the parent to full liability. Interest coverage of 3.12x in 2025Q2 indicates that operating income comfortably covers interest expenses, though the metric was unavailable for 2026Q2. The elevated D/EBITDA of 27.54x in 2026Q2 is misleading because EBITDA is understated due to equity-accounted concessions; on a proportional basis, leverage would appear lower. Investors should monitor the mix of recourse versus non-recourse debt and the impact of rising rates on refinancing costs.
Liquidity Buffer Strengthens but Remains Adequate
Current ratio improved to 1.20 in 2026Q2, per financial statements, from 0.94 a year earlier, with cash of $3.9B, indicating a stronger short-term position but still reliant on project cash flows.
The improvement in the current ratio from 0.94 to 1.20 suggests that the company has rebuilt its liquidity buffer, likely through asset sales and working capital releases. However, the quick ratio of 1.09 indicates that inventory is not a significant component, which is typical for a service-oriented concessionaire. Under a severe stress scenario, such as a prolonged downturn in traffic or air travel, the liquidity position could be tested, but the $3.9B cash balance provides a cushion. The negative CCC further supports liquidity by reducing the need for external financing to fund operations.
Misapplied Metric: Consolidated Debt-to-EBITDA
Consolidated D/EBITDA of 27.54x in 2026Q2, per reported data, overstates leverage because equity-accounted concessions like the 407 ETR carry substantial non-recourse debt not fully reflected in EBITDA.
The most commonly misapplied ratio for Ferrovial is the consolidated debt-to-EBITDA, which appears alarmingly high at 27.54x. This metric is distorted because several key assets are equity-accounted, meaning their full revenue and debt are not consolidated, while EBITDA only includes the equity income or dividends received. Analysts should instead use proportional EBITDA, which consolidates the company's share of concession EBITDA, to get a clearer picture of cash-generating power relative to debt. On a proportional basis, leverage would likely be significantly lower, aligning more closely with infrastructure peers like Transurban. This adjustment is critical for accurate credit analysis and valuation.