Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -64.5x · EV/EBITDA 7.9x · ROE -1.7%. (2012–2025 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 | $1.4B | $1.3B | $1.3B | $1.3B | $1.3B | $1.3B | $809M | $1.2B | $959M | $1.2B | — |
| Enterprise Value | $1.5B | $1.4B | $1.4B | $1.3B | $2.1B | $2.3B | $2.0B | $2.4B | $2.2B | $2.5B | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -64.49 | — | 8.52 | 9.03 | 14.16 | — | 30.77 | — | 12.00 | 14.26 | — |
| P/S Ratio | 4.91 | 4.72 | 3.61 | 3.15 | 3.54 | 4.08 | 2.43 | 3.16 | 2.50 | 3.32 | — |
| P/B Ratio | 1.18 | 1.20 | 0.99 | 0.82 | 1.37 | 1.45 | 0.85 | 1.24 | 0.81 | 1.35 | — |
| P/FCF | 8.02 | 7.71 | 5.01 | 5.18 | 4.77 | 6.22 | 5.66 | 5.32 | 5.96 | 7.02 | — |
| P/OCF | 7.32 | 7.04 | 4.85 | 4.77 | 4.73 | 5.70 | 4.86 | 5.01 | 5.18 | 6.83 | — |
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 | — | 5.03 | 3.89 | 3.35 | 5.66 | 7.14 | 5.97 | 6.46 | 5.72 | 6.70 | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 7.91 | 7.63 | 5.31 | 4.52 | 7.65 | 10.09 | 8.68 | 8.89 | 7.76 | 8.89 | — |
| EV / EBIT | 18.52 | 17.86 | 8.90 | 6.80 | 12.60 | 54.09 | 18.47 | 83.80 | 11.26 | 12.52 | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 8.22 | 5.40 | 5.52 | 7.63 | 10.88 | 13.93 | 10.87 | 13.62 | 14.19 | — |
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 | 33.1% | 33.1% | 48.4% | 55.5% | 55.1% | 48.6% | 49.6% | 54.2% | 56.0% | 57.7% | 57.1% |
| Operating Margin | 28.2% | 28.2% | 43.8% | 49.4% | 50.4% | 44.5% | 43.9% | 49.1% | 50.8% | 53.5% | 52.7% |
| Net Profit Margin | -7.2% | -7.2% | 42.4% | 34.9% | 32.1% | 1.8% | 17.0% | -9.9% | 26.8% | 25.4% | 27.4% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -1.7% | -1.7% | 10.7% | 11.2% | 12.7% | 0.6% | 5.9% | -3.5% | 9.8% | 12.1% | 12.7% |
| ROA | -1.5% | -1.5% | 9.7% | 7.5% | 5.7% | 0.3% | 2.4% | -1.5% | 4.3% | 5.2% | 5.4% |
| ROIC | 4.6% | 4.6% | 7.8% | 8.8% | 7.7% | 5.4% | 5.0% | 6.0% | 6.4% | 8.4% | 8.4% |
| ROCE | 6.3% | 6.3% | 10.6% | 11.5% | 9.9% | 7.1% | 6.7% | 8.5% | 9.4% | 11.8% | 12.4% |
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 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 1.02 | 1.24 | 1.35 | 1.39 | 1.16 | 1.54 | 1.27 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.41 | 0.32 | 3.59 | 4.95 | 5.60 | 4.89 | 4.84 | 5.00 | 3.87 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.82 | 1.08 | 1.24 | 1.29 | 1.04 | 1.38 | 1.19 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 0.47 | 0.47 | 0.38 | 0.28 | 2.87 | 4.32 | 5.15 | 4.54 | 4.37 | 4.49 | 3.63 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 0.50 | 0.39 | 0.34 | 2.86 | 4.66 | 8.27 | 5.55 | 7.66 | 7.17 | 5.50 |
| Interest Coverage | 15.55 | 15.55 | 32.25 | 2.93 | 3.50 | 1.15 | 2.12 | 0.41 | 2.68 | 3.05 | 3.00 |
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 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.45 | 0.75 | 1.37 | 0.92 | 0.68 | 0.59 | 0.35 | 1.02 | 0.80 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.31 | 0.31 | 0.42 | 0.71 | 1.35 | 0.90 | 0.66 | 0.57 | 0.35 | 1.00 | 0.76 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.09 | 0.15 | 1.26 | 0.83 | 0.56 | 0.52 | 0.28 | 0.96 | 0.84 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.23 | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.18 | 0.15 | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.18 | 0.19 |
| Inventory Turnover | 40.05 | 40.05 | 67.44 | 60.86 | 57.57 | 56.06 | 55.43 | 51.70 | 49.95 | 61.25 | 35.58 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 22.25 | 13.71 | 22.43 | 11.00 | 12.49 | 17.79 | 6.89 | 27.00 | 3.81 | 5.43 |
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 | 7.9% | 7.8% | 15.4% | 21.2% | 2.2% | 0.2% | 8.6% | 11.5% | 12.3% | 22.9% | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | 130.8% | 191.4% | 24.5% | 35.2% | 122.3% | — | 115.1% | 300.1% | 84.9% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | 11.7% | 11.1% | 7.1% | — | 3.3% | — | 8.3% | 7.0% | — |
| FCF Yield | 12.5% | 13.0% | 20.0% | 19.3% | 21.0% | 16.1% | 17.7% | 18.8% | 16.8% | 14.2% | — |
| Buyback Yield | 3.8% | 3.9% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.8% | 1.4% | 0.1% | 1.9% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 11.7% | 11.7% | 15.4% | 21.2% | 6.0% | 1.5% | 8.7% | 13.4% | 12.3% | 22.9% | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $51M | $51M | $51M | $54M | $51M | $51M | $47M | $44M | $47M | $33M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 14 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 GLOP-PA stock.
GasLog Partners LP's current P/E ratio is -64.5x. The historical average is 14.8x.
GasLog Partners LP's current EV/EBITDA is 7.9x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 7.7x.
GasLog Partners LP's return on equity (ROE) is -1.7%. The historical average is 32.6%.
Based on historical data, GasLog Partners LP is trading at a P/E of -64.5x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
GasLog Partners LP's current dividend yield is 7.93%.
GasLog Partners LP has 33.1% gross margin and 28.2% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
GasLog Partners LP's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 0.5x, indicating low leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Legacy fleet obsolescence and preferred call risk
Margin Compression Signals Asset Drag
Gross margin fell to 59.0% in 2023Q1 from 59.7% in 2022Q4, while net margin turned negative at -7.2%, according to reported financials, indicating legacy vessel inefficiencies and non-cash impairments.
The gross margin decline, though modest, masks a more volatile trend with a 48.8% trough in 2022Q2, reflecting dry-docking and off-hire disruptions. The negative net margin in the latest quarter, despite a positive operating margin, suggests impairment charges on older Steam vessels, which may continue to pressure reported profitability. Investors should monitor whether these charges recur, as they distort the underlying earning power of the charter portfolio.
ROIC Stalls Below Cost of Capital
ROIC has hovered between 0.4% and 2.3% over the past ten quarters, with 2023Q1 at 2.3%, as per financial statements, indicating returns remain well below the cost of capital for a shipping enterprise.
The persistently low ROIC, despite a deleveraging balance sheet, suggests that the asset base—dominated by aging Steam and TFDE vessels—is not generating sufficient returns to justify its carrying value. The improvement from the 2021Q4 trough of -2.4% is encouraging, but the absolute level remains inadequate for a capital-intensive industry. This implies that without fleet renewal or higher charter rates, value creation for equity holders is limited.
Working Capital Efficiency Hides Fleet Utilization
The cash conversion cycle improved to 2 days in 2023Q1 from -7 days in 2020Q4, according to reported figures, but asset turnover remains stagnant at 0.05, indicating that working capital gains are offset by poor fleet productivity.
The near-zero CCC reflects efficient collection and payment practices, with DSO at 14 days and DPO at 18 days, but this is a minor lever in a business where the primary driver is vessel utilization. Asset turnover of 0.05 is typical for LNG carriers, yet the declining revenue per asset suggests that the fleet is not being fully employed or is earning lower TCE rates. This points to a structural issue: the older vessels may be increasingly off-hire or re-chartered at less favorable terms.
Deleveraging Masks Refinancing Exposure
Debt-to-equity improved from 1.35 in 2020Q4 to 0.93 in 2023Q1, while interest coverage rose to 3.10, as per balance sheet data, but absolute debt of $920M remains substantial relative to cash.
The deleveraging trend is positive, with D/EBITDA falling from 23.83 to 12.38 over the same period, indicating that debt is being paid down faster than EBITDA declines. However, the interest coverage of 3.10 is thin for a shipping company with volatile earnings, and the reported D/E may understate true leverage if debt has been transferred to the parent post-merger. Investors should monitor refinancing risk, especially if charter rates weaken further, as the company's ability to service debt could deteriorate.
Liquidity Buffer Strengthens but Remains Thin
The current ratio improved to 0.99 in 2023Q1 from 0.68 in 2020Q4, with cash at $225.6M, according to reported balance sheet data, yet the ratio remains below 1.0, indicating potential stress under severe conditions.
While the liquidity position has improved, the current ratio still suggests that short-term obligations exceed current assets, a common trait in asset-heavy shipping where vessels are not liquid. The quick ratio of 0.98 indicates minimal inventory dependence, but the reliance on charter payments for liquidity means a prolonged off-hire period could strain cash. The parent's support, though not guaranteed, may provide a backstop, but preferred holders should not assume it.
Misapplied EV/EBITDA in Asset-Heavy Shipping
EV/EBITDA of 8.04 appears reasonable, but it obscures the impact of fleet age and dry-docking cycles, as per reported figures, making it a misleading metric for GLOP's legacy vessels.
In LNG shipping, EV/EBITDA fails to capture the capital expenditure required for fleet renewal and the earnings volatility from off-hire days. For GLOP, the metric does not reflect the potential impairment of Steam vessels or the higher opex associated with older assets. A more appropriate measure is EV/EBITDA adjusted for maintenance capex and dry-docking amortization, or a focus on distributable cash flow to assess preferred dividend coverage. Investors should use EV/EBITDA only as a starting point, not a conclusion.