Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -0.9x · EV/EBITDA 13.0x · ROE -17.3%. (2007–2025 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 | $623M | $484M | $428M | $1.3B | $1.4B | $3.8B | $3.7B | $5.9B | $4.5B | $5.3B | $3.8B |
| Enterprise Value | $4.2B | $4.1B | $5.0B | $5.6B | $6.2B | $7.9B | $7.4B | $9.4B | $7.3B | $7.7B | $6.3B |
| P/E Ratio → | -0.90 | — | — | — | — | 617.75 | 9608.00 | 134.46 | 46.13 | 77.84 | 139.12 |
| P/S Ratio | 0.75 | 0.58 | 0.51 | 1.38 | 1.36 | 4.19 | 4.57 | 7.21 | 6.21 | 7.24 | 6.00 |
| P/B Ratio | 0.16 | 0.15 | 0.14 | 0.37 | 0.36 | 0.87 | 0.90 | 1.54 | 1.15 | 1.35 | 1.04 |
| P/FCF | 6.30 | 4.89 | 3.02 | 5.79 | 4.00 | 19.80 | — | 22.04 | — | 149.62 | — |
| P/OCF | 5.15 | 4.00 | 2.60 | 5.65 | 3.78 | 11.92 | 12.18 | 20.47 | 21.08 | 17.99 | 17.48 |
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 | — | 4.94 | 5.92 | 5.89 | 6.04 | 8.79 | 9.23 | 11.52 | 10.02 | 10.52 | 9.85 |
| EV / EBITDA | 12.97 | 12.54 | 16.16 | 13.15 | 11.62 | 16.09 | 10.95 | 14.05 | 18.26 | 18.24 | 17.58 |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | 111.12 | 46.44 | 52.20 | 58.11 | 58.40 | 38.62 | 42.91 | 54.64 |
| EV / FCF | — | 41.52 | 35.22 | 24.78 | 17.73 | 41.55 | — | 35.19 | — | 217.53 | — |
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 | -42.1% | -42.1% | 46.1% | 52.7% | 59.7% | 62.6% | 62.7% | 63.0% | 63.2% | 65.1% | 64.2% |
| Operating Margin | -5.7% | -5.7% | -5.4% | 3.0% | 15.6% | 16.3% | 53.1% | 54.2% | 20.4% | 18.8% | 14.0% |
| Net Profit Margin | -66.4% | -66.4% | -40.8% | -18.3% | -3.4% | 1.1% | 0.3% | 5.4% | 13.6% | 9.5% | 4.5% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -17.3% | -17.3% | -10.2% | -4.7% | -0.9% | 0.2% | 0.1% | 1.1% | 2.5% | 1.8% | 0.8% |
| ROA | -7.2% | -7.2% | -4.2% | -2.0% | -0.4% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 1.5% | 1.0% | 0.4% |
| ROIC | -0.5% | -0.5% | -0.4% | 0.3% | 1.4% | 1.3% | 4.2% | 4.7% | 1.7% | 1.6% | 1.1% |
| ROCE | -0.7% | -0.7% | -0.6% | 0.4% | 1.9% | 1.8% | 5.6% | 6.3% | 2.2% | 2.1% | 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 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 1.17 | 1.17 | 1.46 | 1.24 | 1.30 | 0.98 | 0.94 | 0.93 | 0.72 | 0.63 | 0.69 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 11.49 | 11.49 | 14.98 | 10.31 | 9.48 | 8.62 | 5.70 | 5.32 | 7.08 | 5.88 | 7.10 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 1.13 | 1.44 | 1.21 | 1.24 | 0.95 | 0.92 | 0.92 | 0.70 | 0.61 | 0.67 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 11.07 | 11.07 | 14.78 | 10.07 | 9.00 | 8.43 | 5.53 | 5.25 | 6.94 | 5.69 | 6.87 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 36.63 | 32.20 | 18.98 | 13.73 | 21.75 | — | 13.15 | — | 67.91 | — |
| Interest Coverage | -2.44 | -2.44 | -1.14 | 0.24 | 0.89 | 1.24 | — | — | 2.27 | 1.98 | 1.52 |
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 | 1.83 | 1.83 | 0.51 | 0.58 | 1.05 | 2.09 | 2.41 | 1.51 | 2.16 | 3.81 | 2.32 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.83 | 1.83 | 0.51 | 0.58 | 1.05 | 2.09 | 2.41 | 1.51 | 2.16 | 3.81 | 2.32 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.66 | 0.66 | 0.08 | 0.15 | 0.39 | 0.53 | 1.05 | 0.65 | 1.14 | 0.47 | 0.24 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.10 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | 84.21 | 212.83 | — | — | — | — | — |
| 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 | 0.1% | 0.1% | 3.6% | 4.2% | 10.4% | 4.1% | 4.2% | 2.7% | 3.5% | 3.0% | 3.1% |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | 1529.1% | 7612.8% | 358.5% | 158.0% | 229.0% | 411.7% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | 0.2% | 0.0% | 0.7% | 2.2% | 1.3% | 0.7% |
| FCF Yield | 15.9% | 20.4% | 33.1% | 17.3% | 25.0% | 5.1% | — | 4.5% | — | 0.7% | — |
| Buyback Yield | 1.2% | 1.5% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 17.0% | 1.2% | 2.2% | 0.0% | 1.1% | 5.9% | 37.7% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 1.2% | 1.6% | 3.7% | 4.3% | 27.4% | 5.3% | 6.4% | 2.7% | 4.6% | 8.9% | 40.7% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $45M | $20M | $20M | $21M | $22M | $22M | $22M | $22M | $22M | $16M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 19 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 HPP stock.
Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -0.9x. The historical average is 99.4x.
Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 13.0x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 17.2x.
Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -17.3%. The historical average is -17.5%.
Based on historical data, Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc. is trading at a P/E of -0.9x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc.'s current dividend yield is 0.07%.
Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc. has -42.1% gross margin and -5.7% operating margin.
Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 11.5x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
SF office valuation overhang
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Implied Cap Rate Signals Distress
HPP trades at a P/FFO of 46.3 despite negative FFO, implying a distressed valuation; the implied cap rate likely exceeds 8%, reflecting elevated risk.
With FFO per share negative in Q2 2026, the P/FFO multiple is not meaningful, but the stock's price-to-book of 0.20 suggests the market values the portfolio at a steep discount to book. The implied cap rate, derived from NOI and enterprise value, appears to be in the high single digits, well above typical office transactions, indicating the market is pricing in significant operational and valuation risk. Investors should monitor whether the recent occupancy gains translate into NOI growth that justifies a re-rating.
NOI Margin Volatility Masks Core Trends
NOI margin swung from 60.0% in Q4 2025 to -44.6% in Q1 2026, then recovered to 44.9% in Q2 2026, per financial statements, indicating non-cash charges distorting property-level profitability.
The extreme volatility in NOI margin suggests significant one-time items, likely impairments or accelerated depreciation, rather than a fundamental change in property operations. The underlying portfolio appears to be stabilizing, with occupancy up 470 bps to 82.5%, but the negative margins in some quarters highlight the ongoing cost of vacant space and potential write-downs. FFO growth remains negative, and the recent positive EPS beat appears to be driven by non-operating items, so investors should focus on cash-based metrics like AFFO to gauge true profitability.
Dividend Suspension Reflects Cash Shortfall
FFO payout ratio was 178.2% in Q1 2026, but dividends were suspended in Q4 2025, as reported in cash flow statements, indicating a severe cash shortfall.
The FFO payout ratio exceeded 100% in Q1 2026, and with FFO negative in Q2 2026, the dividend is not covered by operating cash flow. The suspension of the dividend in Q4 2025 was a necessary step to preserve liquidity, but it signals financial strain. AFFO remains negative, and the minimal capex reported suggests that maintenance needs may be understated, further pressuring distributable cash flow. Investors should monitor whether occupancy gains eventually translate into positive AFFO that could support a reinstated dividend.
Leverage Elevated Despite Debt Reduction
Debt-to-equity stands at 1.25, down from 1.49 in Q1 2025, but remains above peers like KRC at 0.86, per reported figures, indicating a strained balance sheet.
Total debt has been reduced from $4.6B to $3.7B, but the equity base has also shrunk due to impairments and losses, keeping leverage high. Interest coverage is negative, as FFO is insufficient to cover interest expenses, which is a critical concern. The company's liquidity position has tightened, with cash dropping to $80.8M, and the reliance on asset sales and joint ventures may be necessary to meet near-term obligations. The high fixed-rate exposure and maturity profile warrant close monitoring, especially given the valuation resets in the San Francisco office market.
Occupancy Gains Amid Geographic Concentration
In-service occupancy rose 470 bps to 82.5% in Q2 2026, with 1.3M sq ft leased, as per earnings releases, but the portfolio remains concentrated in San Francisco and Los Angeles.
The occupancy improvement is a positive sign, but the portfolio's heavy exposure to the West Coast tech and media sectors remains a vulnerability. The lease-up includes significant government leasing, which may provide stability, but the mark-to-market on expiring San Francisco leases is unfavorable. G&A efficiency appears reasonable, but the specialized nature of the studio assets could limit re-leasing options if media demand weakens. Investors should monitor whether occupancy gains translate into rental rate growth, especially in the challenged San Francisco office market.
P/E Misleads Due to Depreciation
Standard P/E is distorted by depreciation and impairments; HPP's P/E of -1.13 is meaningless, while P/FFO and P/AFFO are more appropriate, but FFO is negative.
The most commonly misapplied ratio for REITs is the P/E, which is heavily impacted by non-cash depreciation charges. For HPP, the negative P/E reflects large impairments, not operational performance. Investors should use P/FFO or P/AFFO, but these are also negative, indicating that the company is not generating enough cash to cover its obligations. An alternative approach is to focus on NOI and cap rates to value the underlying real estate, but the market's discount suggests skepticism about the sustainability of the current occupancy recovery.