Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 67.2x · EV/EBITDA 9.6x · ROE 3.3%. (2018–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $1.6B | $1.8B | $1.9B | $1.8B | $1.4B | $1.4B | $942M | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $2.4B | $2.6B | $2.7B | $2.6B | $2.3B | $2.4B | $2.6B | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 67.21 | 45.45 | 108.89 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 1.00 | 1.17 | 1.32 | 1.21 | 0.92 | 1.02 | 0.69 | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 1.35 | 1.48 | 1.65 | 1.55 | 1.18 | 1.26 | 2.58 | — | — |
| P/FCF | 15.83 | 51.68 | 19.87 | 10.41 | 27.69 | — | 20.13 | — | — |
| P/OCF | 15.52 | 17.24 | 10.63 | 7.53 | 11.50 | — | 10.23 | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 1.68 | 1.83 | 1.75 | 1.55 | 1.71 | 1.87 | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 9.62 | 10.11 | 12.33 | 14.19 | 14.42 | 18.63 | 13.25 | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 20.70 | 23.12 | 31.45 | 42.52 | 57.81 | 129.19 | 35.63 | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 74.51 | 27.50 | 15.04 | 46.67 | — | 54.54 | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 39.6% | 39.6% | 48.1% | 43.9% | 43.0% | 39.7% | 42.9% | 42.9% | 44.8% |
| Operating Margin | 7.6% | 7.6% | 6.0% | 4.1% | 2.7% | 0.7% | 4.8% | 0.6% | 3.2% |
| Net Profit Margin | 2.6% | 2.6% | 1.2% | -0.6% | -1.1% | -2.7% | -1.8% | -7.0% | -6.0% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 3.3% | 3.3% | 1.5% | -0.8% | -1.4% | -5.1% | -6.6% | -21.0% | -13.4% |
| ROA | 1.7% | 1.7% | 0.7% | -0.4% | -0.7% | -1.5% | -1.0% | -3.5% | -2.4% |
| ROIC | 4.5% | 4.5% | 3.4% | 2.3% | 1.4% | 0.4% | 2.5% | 0.3% | 1.2% |
| ROCE | 5.6% | 5.6% | 4.2% | 2.8% | 1.8% | 0.5% | 3.0% | 0.3% | 1.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.72 | 0.84 | 0.88 | 4.48 | 4.50 | 3.64 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 3.20 | 3.20 | 3.62 | 4.58 | 6.06 | 7.69 | 8.47 | 12.73 | 13.13 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.65 | 0.63 | 0.69 | 0.81 | 0.86 | 4.42 | 4.45 | 3.57 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 3.10 | 3.10 | 3.42 | 4.37 | 5.86 | 7.58 | 8.36 | 12.58 | 12.90 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 22.82 | 7.63 | 4.63 | 18.97 | — | 34.41 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 2.00 | 2.00 | 1.45 | 0.89 | 0.73 | 0.27 | 0.72 | 0.05 | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 2.51 | 2.51 | 2.26 | 2.46 | 2.93 | 2.41 | 1.78 | 2.11 | 2.41 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.74 | 0.66 | 0.49 | 0.52 | 0.56 | 0.80 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.14 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.14 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.66 | 0.63 | 0.63 | 0.60 | 0.56 | 0.55 | 0.50 | 0.40 |
| Inventory Turnover | 1.93 | 1.93 | 1.89 | 2.17 | 1.73 | 1.61 | 2.00 | 2.14 | 1.68 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 27.02 | 27.21 | 25.58 | 21.36 | 27.44 | 32.34 | 26.56 | 41.51 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 1.5% | 2.2% | 0.9% | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 6.3% | 1.9% | 5.0% | 9.6% | 3.6% | — | 5.0% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.8% | 0.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.8% | 0.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $199M | $199M | $195M | $190M | $135M | $90M | $188M | $545000 |
Includes 30+ ratios · 8 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 HLMN stock.
Hillman Solutions Corp.'s current P/E ratio is 67.2x. The historical average is 77.2x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Hillman Solutions Corp.'s current EV/EBITDA is 9.6x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 13.8x.
Hillman Solutions Corp.'s return on equity (ROE) is 3.3%. The historical average is -5.4%.
Based on historical data, Hillman Solutions Corp. is trading at a P/E of 67.2x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Hillman Solutions Corp. has 39.6% gross margin and 7.6% operating margin.
Hillman Solutions Corp.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 3.2x, indicating high leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Leverage rising amid thin profitability
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Trailing Multiples Stretched Versus Forward Estimates
Based on reported figures, HLMN trades at 41.60 times trailing earnings but only 13.90 times forward estimates, a gap suggesting the market is pricing a sharp earnings recovery rather than current results.
The collapse from trailing to forward P/E implies analysts expect earnings to roughly triple, a steep assumption given that quarterly net margin has ranged from negative 1.3 percent to 5.5 percent over the past ten quarters. EV/EBITDA of 9.41 times trailing and 7.29 times forward is more moderate, and P/S of 1.05 is reasonable for a distributor, so investors should monitor whether the earnings inflection materializes before treating the multiple as attractive. The absence of a PEG ratio limits growth-adjusted comparison against peers such as POOL at 19.51 times earnings and SITE at 33.45 times.
Gross Margin Gains Not Reaching Earnings
As reported in financial statements, HLMN gross margin rose to 50.8 percent in 2026Q3 from 45.6 percent a year earlier, yet operating margin of 8.3 percent remains below the 10.8 percent achieved in 2025Q3.
The widening gap between gross and operating margin suggests that cost growth below gross profit, likely in field service labor and SG&A tied to the direct store delivery network, is absorbing pricing and mix benefits. Net margin of 1.4 percent in the latest quarter, compared with 5.5 percent a year earlier, indicates the operating shortfall is compounding through interest and other items. The pattern points to a structural cost base that may cap earning power unless operating leverage reasserts itself.
Debt Burden Outpacing Interest Coverage Gains
Based on reported figures, HLMN debt-to-EBITDA climbed to 14.09 in 2026Q3 and interest coverage fell to 1.70, down from 3.12 in 2025Q3, suggesting debt service has become materially less comfortable.
Reported debt-to-equity of 0.87 in the latest quarter, up from 0.64 a year earlier, is consistent with a company that has funded acquisitions with borrowing as total debt rose toward $1.1B. Coverage near 1.7 times leaves limited headroom if operating income softens further, and refinancing terms or covenant headroom are not disclosed in the supplied data and warrant further investigation. The debt-to-equity figure of 0.67 cited in one data flag conflicts with the quarterly series and should be verified against the balance sheet footnotes before relying on it.
Returns Thin Relative to Capital Deployed
According to reported quarterly data, HLMN ROIC peaked at 1.8 percent in 2025Q3 and stood at 1.3 percent in 2026Q3, with ROE of 0.5 percent, well below the 17 to 18 percent ROIC shown for POOL and FERG.
Returns on invested capital in the low single digits suggest the acquisition-driven asset base, dominated by goodwill of $936M, is not yet generating economic returns commensurate with its cost. The gap to higher-return peers appears partly structural, reflecting the capital-intensive robotics build-out and the DSD service model, rather than purely cyclical. Investors should monitor whether ROIC trends upward as acquired businesses and robotics kiosks mature.
Adequate Current Coverage Masks Thin Cash
Based on reported figures, HLMN current ratio of 2.60 and quick ratio of 0.83 appear adequate on paper, yet cash of $35.1M against $1.1B of total debt leaves a narrow buffer under stress.
The gap between current and quick ratios indicates reliance on inventory, consistent with the high SKU count and inventory days of roughly 180 to 220 across recent quarters. Under a severe demand or refinancing shock, the company would likely depend on operating cash flow and revolver access, neither of which can be fully verified from the supplied data. The liquidity picture therefore warrants monitoring rather than comfort.
Low Debt-to-Equity Figure May Understate Leverage
Based on reported quarterly ratios, the 0.67 debt-to-equity figure sits oddly against 14.09 debt-to-EBITDA and $1.1B of total debt, which may indicate the headline leverage metric is understating balance sheet risk.
A debt-to-equity ratio that appears low alongside rising absolute debt and collapsing interest coverage warrants further investigation, since the two metrics would typically move together for a levered acquirer. The most commonly misapplied metric for this business is debt-to-equity itself, because goodwill-heavy equity distorts the denominator; debt-to-EBITDA or interest coverage better reflects servicing capacity. Investors should verify the calculation basis in the balance sheet footnotes before relying on the headline figure.