Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -13.7x · EV/EBITDA N/A · ROE -26.2%. (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 | $808M | $323M | $457M | $148M | $410M | $1.1B | $1.72T | $866M | — |
| Enterprise Value | $789M | $304M | $454M | $142M | $298M | $818M | $1.72T | $881M | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -13.73 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 232.47 | 92.89 | 302.54 | 219.66 | 194.89 | 5338.70 | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 4.14 | 1.68 | 1.87 | 0.48 | 0.97 | 1.93 | 2685.79 | — | — |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 87.55 | 300.92 | 211.86 | 141.64 | 4089.69 | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | — | — | — | 5215.42 | — | — |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | -166.5% | -166.5% | 6.2% | -155.4% | -316.8% | -1268.5% | — | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -1872.1% | -1872.1% | -4261.0% | -20441.8% | -7551.3% | -48048.5% | — | — | — |
| Net Profit Margin | -1645.7% | -1645.7% | -3449.2% | -18379.5% | -7281.9% | -48024.0% | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -26.2% | -26.2% | -18.9% | -33.8% | -31.4% | -16.1% | 104.2% | — | -2.4% |
| ROA | -24.5% | -24.5% | -17.6% | -31.9% | -29.9% | -15.6% | 96.9% | -194.7% | -0.1% |
| ROIC | -23.5% | -23.5% | -17.8% | -33.6% | -38.8% | -25.7% | -13.0% | — | — |
| ROCE | -29.4% | -29.4% | -22.9% | -36.9% | -32.0% | -15.9% | -6.8% | -1361.7% | -81342.9% |
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 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.01 | — | 2.52 |
| Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.10 | -0.01 | -0.02 | -0.26 | -0.45 | -0.60 | — | -42.43 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | — | — | — | — | — | — | 60.37 | -3.33 | — |
Net cash position: cash ($23M) exceeds total debt ($4M)
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 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 9.17 | 12.02 | 22.08 | 25.37 | 69.89 | 0.55 | 4.17 |
| Quick Ratio | 10.00 | 10.00 | 9.17 | 12.02 | 22.08 | 25.36 | 69.87 | 0.55 | 3.82 |
| Cash Ratio | 9.36 | 9.36 | 8.41 | 10.79 | 21.33 | 24.76 | 67.52 | 0.51 | 2.92 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | — | — | — |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | 118.62 | 24.01 | 13.47 | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 51.36 | 465.14 | 21.73 | 196.89 | 127.75 | — | — | — |
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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $175M | $175M | $181M | $175M | $172M | $104.3B | $87M | $28M |
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 HYLN stock.
Hyliion Holdings Corp.'s current P/E ratio is -13.7x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Hyliion Holdings Corp.'s return on equity (ROE) is -26.2%. The historical average is -3.5%.
Based on historical data, Hyliion Holdings Corp. is trading at a P/E of -13.7x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Hyliion Holdings Corp. has -166.5% gross margin and -1872.1% operating margin.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Cash burn and commercialization risk
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Gross Margin Inflection on Tiny Base
Gross margin swung from -166.5% in 2025Q2 to +7.4% in 2026Q2, yet operating margin remains deeply negative at -3.1%, indicating the company still loses money on every dollar of revenue. According to the latest quarterly data, this improvement is not yet translating into sustainable profitability.
The dramatic gross margin improvement in 2026Q2 appears to be driven by the initial military contract revenue, which likely carries higher margins than legacy powertrain sales. However, operating margin of -3.1% and net margin of -2.8% show that R&D and SG&A costs still overwhelm the revenue base. The company's true earning power is negative, and the positive gross margin may be a one-off project effect rather than a structural shift. Investors should monitor whether gross margin can remain positive as revenue mix evolves.
Persistent Negative Returns on Capital
ROIC has remained consistently negative, hovering around -5% to -7% over the past ten quarters, with 2026Q2 at -7.1%. As reported in the financial statements, the company is destroying value on every dollar of invested capital, with no sign of near-term improvement.
The negative ROIC is driven by both negative operating margins and a very low asset turnover of 0.03, indicating that the asset base is not generating sufficient revenue. The company's heavy investment in R&D and manufacturing tooling has not yet produced a return, and the recent revenue spike is too small to move the needle. The trend suggests that the company is still in the investment phase, and returns will only improve if the KARNO generator achieves commercial scale. The lack of positive returns over a multi-year period underscores the high risk of the capital allocation strategy.
Working Capital Efficiency Improves but Remains Weak
The cash conversion cycle improved to 59 days in 2026Q2 from 54 days in 2026Q1, but DSO remains elevated at 52 days, reflecting slow collection on project-based revenue. Based on the quarterly data, asset turnover of 0.03 indicates the company's assets are not yet productive.
The improvement in CCC is driven by a reduction in DIO from 37 to 31 days, suggesting better inventory management as the company shifts away from legacy powertrain components. However, DSO of 52 days is high for a company with such a small revenue base, possibly indicating extended payment terms on the military contract. The asset turnover of 0.03 is extremely low, reflecting the large cash and PPE base relative to revenue. This suggests that the company's efficiency will only improve when revenue scales significantly, which remains uncertain.
Minimal Leverage Masks Refinancing Risk
Debt-to-equity stands at 0.02, indicating virtually no leverage, but the company's cash burn of roughly $15 million per quarter means it may need to raise capital soon. According to the balance sheet data, total debt is only $3.0 million, providing little buffer against liquidity needs.
The company's conservative capital structure provides flexibility, but it also indicates limited access to debt markets, likely due to its negative profitability. With cash and equivalents of $13.2 million and a quarterly burn rate of around $15 million, the company has less than one quarter of runway without additional financing. The low debt levels mean that any future financing will likely be equity-based, which could be dilutive to existing shareholders. Investors should monitor the company's ability to secure funding on favorable terms as it approaches the end of its cash runway.
Liquidity Metrics Overstate True Cash Position
The current ratio of 7.59 in 2026Q2 appears strong, but cash and equivalents of $13.2 million cover less than one quarter of operating losses. As reported in the balance sheet, the company's quick ratio of 7.47 is misleading given the minimal revenue and high cash burn.
The high current and quick ratios are driven by a large cash balance relative to current liabilities, but this cash is being consumed rapidly. With operating cash flow averaging -$12.3 million per quarter over the last ten quarters, the company's liquidity position is precarious. The current ratio does not reflect the ongoing cash burn, and the company may need to raise capital or cut costs to avoid a liquidity crisis. The reported liquidity metrics may give a false sense of security, and investors should focus on the cash runway rather than the current ratio.
Misapplied P/S Ratio on Pre-Revenue Model
The price-to-sales ratio of 201.16 is often used to value Hyliion, but it is misleading given the company's minimal revenue and negative margins. Based on the reported figures, a more appropriate metric is EV/EBITDA, which is not meaningful due to negative EBITDA, or a discounted cash flow analysis based on future KARNO adoption.
The P/S ratio is commonly misapplied to pre-revenue companies like Hyliion because it assumes revenue will scale, but the current revenue base is tiny and project-dependent. The company's negative gross margins and operating losses indicate that sales are not yet generating value. Instead, investors should focus on the company's cash runway, the progress of KARNO commercialization, and the potential for licensing or partnership deals. The P/S ratio obscures the fact that the company is still burning cash and has no clear path to profitability, making it an unreliable valuation metric for this business model.