Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 26.5x · EV/EBITDA 16.4x · ROE 11.7%. (2006–2025 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 | $86.2B | $92.5B | $85.8B | $72.6B | $57.6B | $77.3B | $64.0B | $52.3B | $43.6B | $41.9B | $33.8B |
| Enterprise Value | $105.7B | $111.9B | $105.7B | $94.6B | $74.1B | $90.8B | $80.3B | $59.5B | $50.3B | $47.5B | $39.8B |
| P/E Ratio → | 26.50 | 28.07 | 31.17 | 30.65 | 39.76 | 19.05 | 30.58 | 27.06 | 21.96 | 16.68 | 23.81 |
| P/S Ratio | 7.27 | 7.80 | 7.91 | 7.98 | 6.38 | 8.84 | 8.11 | 8.35 | 7.23 | 7.41 | 5.83 |
| P/B Ratio | 3.01 | 3.19 | 3.10 | 2.81 | 2.53 | 3.40 | 3.26 | 3.01 | 2.52 | 2.47 | 2.14 |
| P/FCF | 20.11 | 21.57 | 20.42 | 23.77 | 18.73 | 28.93 | 25.89 | 22.21 | 19.36 | 24.25 | 18.94 |
| P/OCF | 18.50 | 19.84 | 18.62 | 20.49 | 16.19 | 24.74 | 22.21 | 19.67 | 17.22 | 20.10 | 15.73 |
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 | — | 9.44 | 9.74 | 10.40 | 8.22 | 10.39 | 10.18 | 9.51 | 8.34 | 8.39 | 6.86 |
| EV / EBITDA | 16.37 | 17.34 | 18.08 | 19.27 | 15.88 | 20.38 | 21.21 | 17.86 | 15.88 | 16.29 | 14.29 |
| EV / EBIT | 21.59 | 22.02 | 23.29 | 25.55 | 30.58 | 14.84 | 25.70 | 21.53 | 18.21 | 17.50 | 17.90 |
| EV / FCF | — | 26.10 | 25.15 | 30.98 | 24.13 | 34.01 | 32.48 | 25.30 | 22.34 | 27.48 | 22.28 |
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 | 61.9% | 61.9% | 55.5% | 57.1% | 54.0% | 54.7% | 52.1% | 56.4% | 56.6% | 56.4% | 53.3% |
| Operating Margin | 38.7% | 38.7% | 36.6% | 37.3% | 37.8% | 37.6% | 36.8% | 40.8% | 41.2% | 40.7% | 36.4% |
| Net Profit Margin | 26.1% | 26.1% | 23.4% | 23.9% | 15.0% | 44.3% | 25.3% | 29.5% | 31.7% | 43.2% | 23.9% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 11.7% | 11.7% | 10.3% | 9.8% | 6.4% | 19.2% | 11.3% | 11.2% | 11.6% | 15.4% | 9.3% |
| ROA | 2.4% | 2.4% | 2.0% | 1.4% | 0.7% | 2.5% | 1.9% | 2.1% | 2.3% | 3.2% | 1.8% |
| ROIC | 7.5% | 7.5% | 6.7% | 6.2% | 7.0% | 7.0% | 7.3% | 8.0% | 8.1% | 7.9% | 7.3% |
| ROCE | 9.5% | 9.5% | 8.5% | 7.6% | 8.5% | 8.8% | 9.5% | 10.2% | 10.2% | 10.0% | 9.3% |
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 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.75 | 0.89 | 0.81 | 0.62 | 0.86 | 0.47 | 0.43 | 0.36 | 0.40 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 3.14 | 3.14 | 3.54 | 4.67 | 3.94 | 3.18 | 4.45 | 2.43 | 2.35 | 2.09 | 2.29 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.67 | 0.72 | 0.85 | 0.73 | 0.60 | 0.83 | 0.42 | 0.39 | 0.33 | 0.38 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 3.01 | 3.01 | 3.40 | 4.48 | 3.55 | 3.04 | 4.30 | 2.18 | 2.12 | 1.91 | 2.14 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 4.53 | 4.72 | 7.21 | 5.40 | 5.08 | 6.59 | 3.08 | 2.98 | 3.22 | 3.34 |
| Interest Coverage | 6.51 | 6.51 | 4.99 | 4.58 | 3.94 | 14.47 | 8.75 | 9.71 | 11.33 | 14.51 | 12.48 |
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 | 1.02 | 1.02 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 1.05 | 1.01 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.01 | 0.99 | 0.97 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.02 | 1.02 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 1.05 | 1.01 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.01 | 0.99 | 0.97 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 |
| 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 | 1.3% | 1.2% | 1.2% | 1.3% | 1.5% | 1.0% | 1.0% | 1.2% | 1.3% | 1.1% | 1.2% |
| Payout Ratio | 33.4% | 33.4% | 37.7% | 40.3% | 59.0% | 18.4% | 32.0% | 32.1% | 27.9% | 18.8% | 28.6% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 3.8% | 3.6% | 3.2% | 3.3% | 2.5% | 5.2% | 3.3% | 3.7% | 4.6% | 6.0% | 4.2% |
| FCF Yield | 5.0% | 4.6% | 4.9% | 4.2% | 5.3% | 3.5% | 3.9% | 4.5% | 5.2% | 4.1% | 5.3% |
| Buyback Yield | 1.6% | 1.5% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 1.2% | 0.4% | 2.1% | 2.9% | 2.9% | 2.5% | 0.3% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 2.9% | 2.7% | 1.3% | 1.4% | 2.7% | 1.4% | 3.1% | 4.1% | 4.2% | 3.6% | 1.5% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $571M | $576M | $565M | $561M | $565M | $555M | $565M | $579M | $594M | $599M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 20 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 ICE stock.
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 26.5x. The historical average is 29.6x. This places it at the 55th percentile of its historical range.
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 16.4x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 17.5x.
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 11.7%. The historical average is 13.6%.
Based on historical data, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. is trading at a P/E of 26.5x. This is at the 55th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.'s current dividend yield is 1.27% with a payout ratio of 33.4%.
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. has 61.9% gross margin and 38.7% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 3.1x, indicating high leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Regulatory and legal overhang
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Premium Multiple for Hybrid Model
ICE trades at 2.99x tangible book and 26.3x trailing earnings, a premium to CME's 3.34x P/B but below Nasdaq's 4.44x, reflecting its diversified data and technology mix, as per market data.
The forward P/E of 18.9x implies the market expects significant earnings growth, likely from the Black Knight integration and data services expansion. The P/B of 2.99x, while lower than peers like CBOE (6.09x), still suggests investors are paying for a franchise with durable competitive advantages. The PEG of 2.96x indicates that the current growth rate may not justify the multiple, but this could be understated if the mortgage technology segment delivers on its long-term potential.
ROE Understated by Intangibles
Reported ROE of 3.2% in 2026Q2 is misleadingly low due to heavy intangible amortization from acquisitions like Black Knight; adjusted cash earnings likely yield a much higher return on tangible equity, as per financial statements.
The DuPont decomposition shows that ICE's profitability is driven by high fee income (99.3% of revenue) and operating leverage, but the equity base is inflated by goodwill and intangibles. The efficiency ratio of 18.8% in 2026Q2 indicates exceptional cost control, but the volatile swings (from 41.4% in 2025Q4) suggest one-time items. Investors should focus on ROTCE, which, when adjusted for intangibles, likely exceeds 20%, reflecting the true earnings power of the exchange and data businesses.
NIM Irrelevant, Efficiency Volatile
Net interest margin is effectively zero, as ICE is not a traditional bank; the efficiency ratio swung from 41.4% in 2025Q4 to 18.8% in 2026Q2, indicating high operating leverage but also potential noise, based on reported figures.
The negative NIM reflects ICE's non-bank structure where interest expense exceeds income, but this is immaterial to the business model. The efficiency ratio's volatility is concerning; the 2026Q1 spike to 35.8% may be due to acquisition-related costs, while the 2026Q2 drop suggests strong revenue growth outpacing fixed costs. This pattern indicates that ICE's cost base is largely fixed, and any revenue acceleration can drop straight to the bottom line, but investors should monitor for sustainable cost discipline.
Leverage Reflects Non-Bank Model
Equity-to-assets ratio of 0.17 is low for a traditional bank but typical for an exchange, where assets are mostly intangibles; regulatory capital ratios are not applicable, but the balance sheet supports continued M&A, as per balance sheet data.
ICE's equity base of $29.6B against $174.2B in assets is heavily weighted toward goodwill and intangibles from acquisitions. The tangible book value per share is negative (-$28.06), which is common for asset-light exchanges but raises questions about capital adequacy if writedowns occur. However, the strong cash flow generation (OCF/NI > 1.0) provides ample capacity for debt service and shareholder returns, as evidenced by rising buybacks and dividends.
Provisions Spike Not Credit Losses
Loan loss provisions spiked to $1.1B in 2025Q3 but are non-cash accounting entries, not actual credit losses, given ICE's non-bank structure; asset quality metrics are not meaningful, as per financial statements.
The provision expense appears to be related to clearing house default fund contributions or regulatory requirements, not traditional loan losses. ICE's assets are primarily intangible and financial investments, not loans, so traditional asset quality metrics like NPL ratios are irrelevant. Investors should instead monitor the creditworthiness of clearing members and the performance of the mortgage technology segment, which is exposed to housing market cycles.
Trading at Discount to Data Peers
ICE's P/B of 2.99x is below CME's 3.34x and Nasdaq's 4.44x, but its ROE of 3.2% is far lower due to intangible amortization; on an adjusted basis, ICE's profitability likely rivals peers, as per peer data.
The peer comparison shows ICE trading at a discount to CBOE (6.09x P/B) and MarketAxess (5.16x), which may reflect the market's concern over the mortgage technology cyclicality. However, ICE's diversified revenue mix (data, exchanges, mortgage) provides a more stable earnings stream than pure-play exchanges. The gap in ROE is largely due to accounting differences; when adjusting for intangibles, ICE's ROTCE is likely in line with or above peers, suggesting the discount may be unwarranted.
P/E Distorted by Amortization
The most misapplied ratio for ICE is P/E, as GAAP earnings are understated by significant amortization of intangibles from acquisitions like Black Knight, making the trailing P/E of 26.3x appear higher than the true cash earnings multiple, as per financial statements.
Investors should use price-to-tangible book value or adjusted earnings (excluding amortization) to value ICE. The negative tangible book value makes P/TBV unusable, so a better approach is to use EV/EBITDA or price-to-cash earnings. The forward P/E of 18.9x partially adjusts for this, but it still relies on analyst estimates that may not fully capture the cash generation. A more accurate valuation metric would be price-to-operating cash flow, which reflects the underlying profitability of the exchange and data businesses.