Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -0.1x · EV/EBITDA N/A · ROE -2058.6%. (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 | $791772 | $564563 | $3M | $13M | $23M | $80M | $21M | $11M | $4M | $28M | $1.7B |
| Enterprise Value | $-982224 | $-1209434 | $5M | $-1711468 | $-28243905 | $-10900235 | $-18782042 | $-2165045 | $2M | $22M | $1.7B |
| P/E Ratio → | -0.08 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 0.24 | 0.21 | — | 1.77 | 0.46 | 0.86 | 0.52 | 0.70 | 1.84 | 7.53 | 186.75 |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 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 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Profit Margin | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -2058.6% | -2058.6% | -487.0% | -171.3% | -59.1% | -49.0% | -72.5% | -80.0% | -332.8% | -235.4% | -287.0% |
| ROA | -353.5% | -353.5% | -133.9% | -124.9% | -51.5% | -43.0% | -58.8% | -48.9% | -97.2% | -101.4% | -94.6% |
| ROIC | -409.9% | -409.9% | -2302.2% | — | -9983.0% | -1817.8% | -991.8% | -377.9% | -1878.7% | — | — |
| ROCE | -671.3% | -671.3% | -343.2% | -148.7% | -61.6% | -43.6% | -64.0% | -63.8% | -208.7% | -174.7% | -179.2% |
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 | 0.02 | 0.02 | — | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.73 | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.67 | — | -2.00 | -1.03 | -0.98 | -0.99 | -0.84 | -0.71 | -1.61 | -1.43 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | -338.17 | -338.17 | -11.96 | -5211.37 | -4434.65 | -3692.66 | -645.11 | -14.00 | -43.03 | — | — |
Net cash position: cash ($2M) exceeds total debt ($54066)
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 | 10.25 | 10.25 | 0.51 | 3.31 | 7.16 | 11.88 | 9.15 | 8.94 | 1.04 | 2.33 | 4.48 |
| Quick Ratio | 10.25 | 10.25 | 0.51 | 3.31 | 7.16 | 11.88 | 9.15 | 8.94 | 1.04 | 2.33 | 4.48 |
| Cash Ratio | 6.11 | 6.11 | 0.13 | 2.80 | 6.49 | 11.13 | 8.74 | 8.65 | 0.99 | 2.29 | 4.41 |
| Asset Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 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 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 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% | 0.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $9M | $122894 | $79416 | $76229 | $70291 | $9677 | $2043 | $184 | $138 | $5208 |
Imminent liquidity insolvency risk
According to recent market data, HEPA trades at a price-to-book ratio of 0.18, a figure that suggests the market is pricing the company as a distressed asset rather than a going concern, significantly trailing the valuation multiples observed in peer NASH developers like Akero Therapeutics.
The extremely low P/B ratio indicates that investors have largely written off the book value of the company's assets, likely due to the severe cash depletion and the binary nature of its clinical pipeline. This valuation gap compared to peers suggests that the market is not assigning meaningful value to the Rencofilstat intellectual property, viewing the firm's immediate liquidity crisis as the primary determinant of its current market capitalization.
Based on reported financial statements, HEPA has consistently generated negative ROIC, with figures reaching -8.1% in 2026Q1, reflecting a long-term trend of capital destruction that underscores the difficulty of compounding value in a pre-revenue clinical-stage biotechnology model without a commercialized product.
The inability to generate positive returns on invested capital is a structural characteristic of the firm's current R&D-heavy phase, where capital is consumed by clinical trials rather than deployed into revenue-generating assets. Investors should monitor whether any future strategic partnership could reverse this trend, though current data suggests that the company remains in a cycle of value decay.
As reported in recent SEC filings, the company's current ratio has fluctuated wildly, yet the absolute cash position of approximately $1.8M suggests a precarious liquidity profile that leaves the firm highly vulnerable to any operational delays or unexpected increases in clinical trial costs.
While the current ratio appears superficially high in some periods, this is largely a function of the company's limited asset base rather than operational strength. The lack of a sustainable liquidity cushion implies that the firm may face an imminent need for dilutive financing or a strategic restructuring to avoid insolvency.
Based on a comparison with industry peers like Madrigal Pharmaceuticals and Akero Therapeutics, HEPA lags significantly in terms of financial stability and market positioning, with its lack of commercial-stage progress creating a structural gap that is unlikely to be bridged without a major capital infusion.
The peer group analysis reveals that while other NASH developers have successfully secured the capital necessary to advance their pipelines, HEPA remains constrained by its limited financial resources. This gap appears structural, as the company's inability to attract similar levels of institutional support suggests a lack of market confidence in its current clinical trajectory.
The price-to-book ratio is frequently misapplied to HEPA, as it fails to capture the potential value of the company's intellectual property and the AI-POWR platform, which are not reflected in the balance sheet due to the accounting treatment of R&D expenses.
Investors often rely on P/B to gauge the floor value of the company, but this metric obscures the reality that the firm's true assets are intangible and highly speculative. A more appropriate analytical framework would involve a risk-adjusted net present value (rNPV) of the Rencofilstat pipeline, rather than relying on accounting-based book value which is inherently distorted by the company's pre-revenue status.
Includes 30+ ratios · 14 years · Updated daily
DCF models, multiple analysis, and analyst estimates.
10-year return with dividends reinvested.
See how regular investing compounds over time.
Compare growth, multiples, and margins vs sector.
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying HEPA stock.
Hepion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -0.1x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Hepion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -2058.6%. The historical average is -197.1%.
Based on historical data, Hepion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is trading at a P/E of -0.1x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.