Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 64.7x · EV/EBITDA 15.1x · ROE 11.3%. (1997–2026 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 | $10.0B | $8.9B | $8.0B | $4.2B | $4.3B | $3.5B | $3.1B | $827M | $505M | $229M | — |
| Enterprise Value | $11.3B | $10.2B | $9.1B | $6.7B | $5.3B | $4.2B | $3.4B | $899M | $561M | $337M | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 64.71 | 57.72 | 94.41 | 11.15 | 20.83 | 15.52 | 20.84 | 33.02 | 72.25 | 12.69 | — |
| P/S Ratio | 5.85 | 5.20 | 5.34 | 3.63 | 7.29 | 5.77 | 9.61 | 11.30 | 8.47 | 5.32 | — |
| P/B Ratio | 6.67 | 5.95 | 6.58 | 3.59 | 5.55 | 6.47 | 11.31 | 6.41 | 4.29 | 1.00 | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | 5.04 | — | — | — | 5.91 | 10.26 | 9.44 | — | — |
| P/OCF | 61.99 | 55.13 | 4.76 | — | — | — | 5.89 | 10.01 | 8.63 | — | — |
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 | — | 6.01 | 6.08 | 5.81 | 9.04 | 6.85 | 10.37 | 12.28 | 9.41 | 7.83 | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 15.11 | 13.64 | 14.04 | 7.13 | 11.87 | 9.37 | 18.63 | 22.81 | 22.05 | 9.67 | — |
| EV / EBIT | 15.84 | 14.30 | 14.04 | 7.17 | 11.92 | 9.53 | 19.31 | 22.88 | 24.22 | 10.10 | — |
| EV / FCF | — | — | 5.75 | — | — | — | 6.37 | 11.15 | 10.49 | — | — |
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 | 72.2% | 72.2% | 52.6% | 70.3% | 71.7% | 72.9% | 57.8% | 76.7% | 91.6% | 96.0% | 98.2% |
| Operating Margin | 32.6% | 32.6% | 31.1% | 55.9% | 55.5% | 64.5% | 51.3% | 45.9% | 31.5% | 57.7% | -3.0% |
| Net Profit Margin | 7.0% | 7.0% | 4.2% | 22.7% | 25.8% | 33.0% | 43.1% | 29.8% | 9.6% | 31.5% | 32.5% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 11.3% | 11.3% | 7.1% | 38.8% | 31.1% | 55.3% | 74.0% | 20.1% | 4.1% | 13.4% | 28.6% |
| ROA | 1.3% | 1.3% | 0.9% | 5.6% | 4.9% | 8.5% | 11.7% | 6.2% | 2.1% | 8.1% | 9.7% |
| ROIC | 15.3% | 15.3% | 12.8% | 21.0% | 17.4% | 31.4% | 28.0% | 11.8% | 5.6% | 9.9% | -0.8% |
| ROCE | 21.3% | 21.3% | 25.4% | 49.9% | 40.7% | 83.6% | 63.0% | 19.9% | 15.8% | 34.4% | -1.8% |
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 | 1.57 | 1.57 | 1.61 | 2.63 | 2.09 | 1.62 | 1.50 | 1.05 | 0.90 | 0.76 | 1.36 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 3.12 | 3.12 | 3.01 | 3.26 | 3.60 | 1.98 | 2.29 | 3.42 | 4.17 | 4.96 | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.92 | 0.92 | 2.16 | 1.33 | 1.21 | 0.89 | 0.56 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.85 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 1.83 | 1.83 | 1.72 | 2.68 | 2.30 | 1.47 | 1.36 | 1.82 | 2.21 | 3.11 | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | 0.70 | — | — | — | 0.47 | 0.89 | 1.05 | — | 7.92 |
| Interest Coverage | 1.46 | 1.46 | 1.21 | 1.87 | 2.13 | 5.73 | 7.76 | 3.85 | 1.58 | 2.26 | 2.52 |
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 | 1.35 | 1.35 | 1.32 | 1.34 | 1.36 | 1.27 | 1.17 | 1.87 | 1.76 | 1.68 | 1.82 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.35 | 1.35 | 1.32 | 1.34 | 1.36 | 1.27 | 1.17 | 1.87 | 1.76 | 1.68 | 1.82 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.16 | 0.09 | 0.10 | 0.28 | 0.26 | 0.33 | 0.35 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.17 | 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.16 | 0.21 | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.21 | 0.17 | 0.16 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 1.5% | 1.7% | 1.1% | 9.0% | 4.8% | 6.4% | 4.8% | 3.0% | 1.4% | 7.9% | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | 19.8% | — | — | — | 16.9% | 9.7% | 10.6% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 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% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $61M | $60M | $59M | $60M | $59M | $58M | $58M | $58M | $33M | $11M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 30 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 FRHC stock.
Freedom Holding Corp.'s current P/E ratio is 64.7x. The historical average is 37.6x. This places it at the 78th percentile of its historical range.
Freedom Holding Corp.'s current EV/EBITDA is 15.1x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 14.4x.
Freedom Holding Corp.'s return on equity (ROE) is 11.3%. The historical average is -9.6%.
Based on historical data, Freedom Holding Corp. is trading at a P/E of 64.7x. This is at the 78th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Freedom Holding Corp. has 72.2% gross margin and 32.6% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Freedom Holding Corp.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 3.1x, indicating high leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Elevated leverage and geopolitical exposure
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Premium Multiple Pricing in Frontier Market
FRHC trades at 6.53x book and 63.4x trailing earnings, per reported data, implying the market prices in sustained high growth despite decelerating revenue and thin net margins.
The P/B of 6.53x is far above the peer group's range of 1.98x (IBKR) to 5.31x (LPLA), suggesting investors are paying for the Kazakhstani ecosystem's growth optionality rather than current profitability. With a forward P/E of 25.3x, the market appears to expect a significant earnings recovery from the depressed trailing base, but the 7.0% net margin and 11% equity-to-assets ratio may not support such optimism if growth continues to moderate. The valuation gap versus peers may reflect a jurisdictional risk premium that could compress if governance improves, but it also leaves little room for disappointment.
Operating Efficiency Fails to Reach Bottom Line
ROE averaged roughly 3% over the last ten quarters, per reported figures, as a 32.6% operating margin is eroded by non-operating drag, leaving net margin at just 7.0%.
The DuPont decomposition reveals that while the efficiency ratio is exceptionally low (15.3% in 2027Q1), the translation to net income is poor, with a wide gap between operating and net margins suggesting significant tax or non-operating charges. ROE of 2.1% in 2027Q1 is far below the cost of equity, and the 11% equity-to-assets ratio implies leverage is not amplifying returns as it does for more traditional banks. The reliance on fee income (59.7% of revenue in 2027Q1) adds volatility, as trading volumes and market conditions can swing quarterly results dramatically.
NIM Recovery Masks Funding Cost Pressures
Net interest margin improved from -1.7% in 2025Q1 to 0.8% in 2027Q1, per reported quarterly data, but remains thin and vulnerable to rising deposit costs in Kazakhstan.
The 250 basis point NIM turnaround is a positive signal, but the absolute level of 0.8% is far below what a traditional bank would need to generate adequate returns on equity. The negative NIMs in prior quarters suggest the company was paying more on deposits than it earned on interest-bearing assets, likely due to a large securities portfolio with yields lagging funding costs. The efficiency ratio's volatility (from 7.5% to 44.5%) indicates that operating leverage is highly sensitive to revenue swings, which is typical of a brokerage-heavy model but makes cost control less predictable.
Thin Equity Cushion Limits Capital Flexibility
Equity-to-assets declined from 14% to 11% over ten quarters, per reported balance sheet data, while debt-to-equity reached 1.57, indicating a thinner buffer for unexpected losses.
The 11% equity-to-assets ratio is low for a financial holding company, especially one with a growing loan book and proprietary trading exposure. With no dividends or buybacks across all ten quarters, management is retaining all earnings, but the capital base is not expanding proportionally to asset growth, which grew 69% over the period. This suggests that organic capital generation is insufficient to support the balance sheet expansion, and the company may need to raise external capital or slow growth to maintain regulatory compliance.
Provision Volatility Signals Credit Cycle Uncertainty
Loan loss provisions swung from a $158.8M charge in 2026Q1 to a $10.7M release in 2027Q1, per reported figures, indicating credit conditions are stabilizing but remain unpredictable.
The sharp reversal in provisions suggests that the earlier charge may have been overly conservative or that the credit environment in Kazakhstan has improved, but the lack of granular disclosure on NPL ratios and coverage makes it difficult to assess adequacy. The rapid growth of the digital loan book, particularly auto and mortgage lending, warrants close monitoring, as frontier market credit risk can deteriorate quickly. The provision release in 2027Q1 may be a one-time event, and investors should not extrapolate it as a trend without more data.
P/E Misleads on Earnings Quality
The trailing P/E of 63.4x is distorted by volatile proprietary trading gains and losses, per reported data, obscuring the underlying profitability of the brokerage and banking operations.
For a financial holding company with significant trading income, P/E is a poor valuation metric because it captures one-time mark-to-market swings that do not reflect recurring earning power. A more appropriate measure is P/B (6.53x) combined with ROTCE, which adjusts for tangible book value and provides a clearer picture of return generation on the capital base. Investors should also adjust for the potential mixing of segregated client funds with corporate cash, which could overstate the true liquidity and equity base, as noted in company intelligence.