Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -2.2x · EV/EBITDA 9.2x · ROE N/A. (2005–2025 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 | $779M | $1.7B | $1.1B | $3.4B | $6.2B | $7.9B | — | — | — | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $18.8B | $19.7B | $18.9B | $20.5B | $20.9B | $10.1B | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -2.25 | — | — | 7.47 | 4.58 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 0.09 | 0.19 | 0.12 | 0.36 | 0.71 | 1.07 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | — | — | 7.32 | 1.10 | 2.34 | 2.64 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 0.48 | 1.02 | 0.50 | 1.37 | 2.44 | 4.36 | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | — | 2.31 | 2.09 | 2.18 | 2.41 | 1.38 | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 9.20 | 8.64 | 5.32 | 6.12 | 6.91 | 3.53 | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 1343.50 | 79.70 | — | 19.06 | 7.21 | 8.78 | — | — | — | — | — |
| 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 | 11.4% | 11.4% | 3.1% | 18.4% | 34.9% | 37.3% | -7.2% | 17.7% | 18.2% | 15.8% | 18.2% |
| Operating Margin | 0.2% | 0.2% | -6.2% | 8.3% | 23.9% | 28.2% | -17.0% | 7.8% | 6.1% | 4.7% | 6.9% |
| Net Profit Margin | -8.8% | -8.8% | -31.6% | 6.6% | 23.7% | 5.0% | -32.6% | -0.6% | -2.4% | 3.7% | -5.6% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | — | — | -176.4% | 21.5% | 73.2% | 23.8% | -173.0% | -3.8% | -16.7% | 25.2% | -31.7% |
| ROA | -3.4% | -3.4% | -12.3% | 2.6% | 9.7% | 2.0% | -8.3% | -0.3% | -1.1% | 1.7% | -2.3% |
| ROIC | 0.1% | 0.1% | -2.2% | 3.1% | 13.8% | 29.4% | -11.2% | 5.0% | 2.8% | 2.1% | 2.9% |
| ROCE | 0.1% | 0.1% | -2.8% | 3.8% | 10.9% | 13.0% | -5.2% | 3.8% | 3.2% | 2.4% | 3.4% |
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 | — | — | 120.31 | 5.77 | 5.92 | 1.51 | 67.98 | 2.95 | 13.85 | 9.78 | 12.60 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 8.42 | 8.42 | 5.17 | 5.33 | 5.18 | 1.57 | 3.97 | 1.48 | 4.88 | 4.41 | 3.98 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | — | 116.44 | 5.52 | 5.57 | 0.75 | 56.19 | 2.49 | 12.89 | 9.07 | 11.84 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 7.91 | 7.91 | 5.00 | 5.10 | 4.87 | 0.78 | 3.28 | 1.25 | 4.54 | 4.09 | 3.74 |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 0.23 | 0.23 | -2.37 | 1.36 | 6.38 | 2.46 | -2.38 | 1.02 | 0.64 | 0.08 | 0.17 |
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 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.74 | 0.77 | 0.87 | 2.76 | 1.33 | 1.03 | 1.51 | 1.48 | 1.28 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.74 | 0.77 | 0.87 | 2.76 | 1.33 | 1.03 | 1.40 | 1.30 | 1.16 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.25 | 0.34 | 1.42 | 0.33 | 0.23 | 0.44 | 0.45 | 0.35 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.38 | 0.42 | 0.38 | 0.39 | 0.37 | 0.31 | 0.40 | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.46 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 27.48 | 17.15 | 25.91 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 47.64 | 48.60 | 46.39 | 40.93 | 37.71 | 53.94 | 68.68 | 60.95 | 56.60 | 53.20 |
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 | — | — | 0.6% | — | — | 3.0% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | 65.3% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | 13.4% | 21.8% | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.3% | 39.7% | 8.3% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 9.3% | 39.7% | 11.3% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $322M | $306M | $326M | $403M | $315M | $150M | $117M | $96M | $95M | $96M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 21 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 HTZ stock.
Hertz Global Holdings, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -2.2x. The historical average is 6.0x.
Hertz Global Holdings, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 9.2x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 6.1x.
Based on historical data, Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. is trading at a P/E of -2.2x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. has 11.4% gross margin and 0.2% operating margin.
Hertz Global Holdings, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 8.4x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Fleet residual value risk
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Margin Volatility Masks Underlying Earning Power
Gross margin swung from 0.8% in Q2 2024 to 19.0% in Q2 2026, per financial statements, yet operating margin remains thin at 7.1%, indicating fleet cost volatility dominates profitability.
The extreme quarterly swings in gross margin—from negative to nearly 22%—reflect the direct pass-through of used-vehicle residual value changes, not operational leverage. The Q2 2026 operating margin of 7.1% is a positive step but still below the 12.1% seen in Q3 2025, suggesting the recovery is uneven. Net margin turned positive at 2.7% in Q2 2026, but the prior five quarters of deep losses imply that the current profitability is fragile and highly sensitive to depreciation timing.
Return on Capital Remains Subdued
ROIC improved to 0.7% in Q2 2026 from -0.8% a year earlier, as reported in financial statements, but remains far below the cost of capital, indicating value destruction persists.
Despite the sequential improvement, ROIC of 0.7% is negligible and insufficient to cover the heavy debt load, with interest coverage at just 1.27x. The company's asset turnover is extremely low at 0.10x, reflecting the massive fleet base relative to revenue. Even with the Q2 2026 profit, the cumulative losses over the past ten quarters have eroded equity to negative, suggesting that returns on capital will remain challenged until fleet rationalization and residual value stabilization take hold.
Working Capital Efficiency Shows Mixed Signals
DSO improved to 44 days in Q2 2026 from 53 days a year earlier, per reported data, while DPO rose to 53 days, indicating better receivables collection and supplier payment terms.
The reduction in DSO suggests improved collection discipline, but the cash conversion cycle remains negative due to the absence of inventory data, which is typical for a rental model where fleet is classified as PP&E. The increase in DPO to 53 days from 40 days in Q4 2025 indicates HTZ is stretching payables, which may provide short-term liquidity relief but could strain supplier relationships. The negative FCF margin of -136.1% in Q2 2026 underscores that working capital improvements are dwarfed by fleet capex outflows.
Leverage Elevated Despite Sequential Improvement
Debt-to-EBITDA fell to 30.83x in Q2 2026 from 40.64x in Q1 2026, per financial statements, but remains extremely high, with interest coverage at only 1.27x.
The improvement in D/EBITDA is largely due to a rebound in EBITDA, not debt reduction, as total debt remains around $21B. Interest coverage of 1.27x indicates that operating income barely covers interest expense, leaving no cushion for adverse fleet value movements. The negative equity position further amplifies refinancing risk, as the company may struggle to access capital markets on favorable terms. Investors should monitor whether the deleveraging trend continues as fleet costs stabilize.
Liquidity Buffer Thin and Deteriorating
Current ratio fell to 0.42 in Q2 2026 from 1.06 in Q2 2024, as per balance sheet data, with cash at $628M, indicating a shrinking cushion against operational shocks.
The current ratio of 0.42 implies that current liabilities exceed current assets by a wide margin, a common feature in asset-heavy rental businesses where fleet is financed with long-term debt. However, the rapid decline from 1.06 to 0.42 over two years suggests a structural tightening of liquidity, especially as cash levels have dropped. The quick ratio is identical to the current ratio, indicating no inventory buffer, which is typical for a service business but leaves no room for error if revenue declines further.
EV/EBITDA Misleads in Fleet-Heavy Model
EV/EBITDA of 8.32x appears reasonable, but it obscures the impact of fleet depreciation and residual value risk, as reported in financial statements, making it a poor standalone valuation metric.
For HTZ, EBITDA is heavily inflated by adding back depreciation on the fleet, which is the single largest cost and directly tied to residual value assumptions. A more appropriate metric is EV/EBITDAR (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization, and rental costs) or a multiple of adjusted operating cash flow that accounts for fleet maintenance capex. The current EV/EBITDA of 8.32x may understate the true leverage and overstate earnings power, as the negative FCF margin of -136.1% in Q2 2026 demonstrates that EBITDA is not translating into cash generation. Investors should adjust for fleet replacement costs and residual value volatility when comparing HTZ to peers.