Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 20.0x · EV/EBITDA 8.5x · ROE N/A. (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 | $2.8B | $2.5B | $973M | $1.5B | $2.0B | $4.6B | — | — | — | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $5.5B | $5.2B | $4.3B | $5.4B | $5.5B | $6.7B | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 20.05 | 17.76 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 1.79 | 1.61 | 0.57 | 0.72 | 1.04 | 2.93 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | — | — | — | 4.41 | 1.50 | 2.65 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | 6.79 | 6.10 | 2.11 | 6.02 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 4.23 | 3.81 | 1.33 | 1.80 | 2.24 | 6.16 | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | — | 3.31 | 2.51 | 2.52 | 2.79 | 4.24 | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 8.52 | 8.08 | 5.10 | 5.54 | 7.00 | 8.68 | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 20.74 | 5.19 | — | — | — | 32.07 | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 12.53 | 9.33 | 21.01 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | 54.6% | 54.6% | 48.0% | 49.0% | 41.0% | 42.6% | 40.2% | 34.1% | 34.4% | 35.8% | 29.9% |
| Operating Margin | 16.8% | 16.8% | 28.0% | 25.0% | 15.9% | 24.6% | 23.7% | -12.8% | 17.6% | 17.4% | 3.1% |
| Net Profit Margin | 9.1% | 9.1% | -95.4% | -93.0% | -23.4% | -1.6% | -22.9% | -34.4% | -11.4% | -38.4% | -91.3% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | — | — | -6332.4% | -231.5% | -29.6% | -1.7% | -24.3% | -30.7% | -9.5% | -28.7% | -41.4% |
| ROA | 3.3% | 3.3% | -33.9% | -33.8% | -7.7% | -0.5% | -7.5% | -10.6% | -3.4% | -10.6% | -19.0% |
| ROIC | 7.1% | 7.1% | 10.0% | 8.9% | 5.4% | 8.4% | 8.4% | -4.4% | 5.7% | 5.0% | 0.7% |
| ROCE | 7.7% | 7.7% | 12.4% | 11.5% | 6.4% | 9.2% | 9.0% | -4.6% | 6.0% | 5.3% | 0.7% |
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 | — | — | — | 11.84 | 2.90 | 1.71 | 2.06 | 1.57 | 1.42 | 1.35 | 1.34 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 5.42 | 5.42 | 4.63 | 4.26 | 5.06 | 3.87 | 3.40 | 9.85 | 3.61 | 3.83 | 6.72 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | — | — | 10.99 | 2.53 | 1.19 | 1.58 | 0.94 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 1.02 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 4.14 | 4.14 | 3.95 | 3.95 | 4.40 | 2.68 | 2.61 | 5.90 | 2.41 | 2.58 | 5.12 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 6.43 | 7.22 | 15.00 | — | — | — | 3.50 | 15.00 | 6.43 | — |
| Interest Coverage | 3.18 | 3.18 | -2.61 | -3.28 | -0.67 | 0.96 | 0.28 | -0.95 | 0.54 | — | — |
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 | 2.08 | 2.08 | 1.33 | 0.80 | 0.99 | 1.72 | 1.45 | 2.16 | 1.68 | 2.51 | 2.17 |
| Quick Ratio | 2.05 | 2.05 | 1.29 | 0.76 | 0.93 | 1.67 | 1.38 | 2.07 | 1.64 | 2.45 | 2.09 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.69 | 0.69 | 0.83 | 0.24 | 0.41 | 1.10 | 0.86 | 1.59 | 1.10 | 1.50 | 1.28 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.35 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.31 | 0.29 | 0.32 | 0.30 | 0.31 | 0.28 | 0.22 |
| Inventory Turnover | 17.05 | 17.05 | 28.96 | 26.72 | 15.59 | 21.59 | 17.03 | 16.65 | 35.72 | 28.53 | 19.74 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 5.0% | 5.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 14.7% | 16.4% | 47.3% | 16.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $342M | $333M | $333M | $331M | $328M | $331M | $331M | $328M | $287M | $239M |
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 IHS stock.
IHS Holding Limited's current P/E ratio is 20.0x. The historical average is 17.8x. This places it at the 100th percentile of its historical range.
IHS Holding Limited's current EV/EBITDA is 8.5x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 6.9x.
Based on historical data, IHS Holding Limited is trading at a P/E of 20.0x. This is at the 100th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
IHS Holding Limited has 54.6% gross margin and 16.8% operating margin. Operating margin between 10-20% is typical for established companies.
IHS Holding Limited's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 5.4x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Negative equity and high leverage
Deep Value or Value Trap?
IHS trades at a forward P/E of 9.2 versus a TTM P/E of 19.8, implying the market expects a sharp earnings recovery. According to reported valuation metrics, the EV/EBITDA of 8.5 is below tower peers, suggesting a discount that may reflect balance sheet risk.
The wide gap between trailing and forward earnings multiples indicates that consensus forecasts anticipate a normalization of earnings power, likely driven by the removal of non-recurring charges. However, given the negative equity and volatile historical earnings, the market's optimism may be premature. Investors should monitor whether the forward earnings materialize, as the current P/E is not anchored to a stable regulatory return but to a speculative recovery.
ROE Unreliable Amid Negative Equity
Reported ROE is either negative or not calculable due to negative equity, with 2025Q3 showing a 4.0% return. As per the ratio data, the negative equity base distorts any ROE calculation, making it an unreliable measure of regulatory performance.
With equity at -$181.7M in 2026Q2, the company's capital structure is inverted, and any positive net income produces a meaningless ROE. This suggests that the company is not earning a return on a positive regulatory equity base, which is atypical for a regulated utility. The absence of a clear authorized ROE and the persistent negative equity indicate that the regulatory compact is not functioning as intended, and investors should focus on cash flow generation rather than ROE.
Margins Masked by Non-Recurring Items
Operating margin swung from 19.3% to 61.4% over the last ten quarters, with the 2025Q4 spike coinciding with a $92.5M D&A charge. Based on the ratio data, these fluctuations suggest margins are distorted by impairments or one-time gains, not operational efficiency.
The extreme volatility in operating margin indicates that cost recovery is not stable, and the company's core profitability is obscured by non-cash items. The 2025Q4 margin of 61.4% is unsustainable and likely reflects a one-time benefit, while the 2026Q2 margin of 19.3% may be closer to the underlying run-rate. This inconsistency complicates the assessment of the company's ability to recover costs through its regulated or contractual pricing mechanisms.
Leverage Exceeds Regulatory Norms
Debt-to-capital has exceeded 1.0 for the past ten quarters, reaching 1.06 in 2026Q2, while equity remains negative. According to the balance sheet data, total debt of $3.5B against negative equity implies a capital structure that is unsustainable for a regulated utility.
The debt-to-capital ratio above 100% indicates that the company is technically insolvent on a book value basis, and interest coverage has been erratic, with negative readings in 2024Q4 and 2024Q1. While the current ratio improved to 1.93, the leverage profile suggests significant refinancing risk and limited financial flexibility. This level of leverage is far beyond what regulators typically allow, and it may impair the company's ability to fund its capital program or access capital markets.
No Dividend, All Cash Retained
IHS has paid no dividends over the last ten quarters, with dividend yield and payout ratio not applicable. As per the cash flow data, all operating cash flow is retained for reinvestment, which is unusual for a utility but necessary given the capital intensity.
The absence of a dividend means that total shareholder return is entirely dependent on capital appreciation, which is a departure from the typical utility investment thesis. While retaining cash supports internal funding of capex, the negative equity and high leverage suggest that the company may need to prioritize debt reduction over growth. Investors should monitor whether the company can generate sufficient cash flow to service debt and eventually return capital to shareholders.
Misapplied P/E on Negative Equity
The most commonly misapplied ratio for IHS is the P/E, as negative equity and volatile earnings make it meaningless. According to the ratio data, the TTM P/E of 19.8 is based on distorted earnings, and the forward P/E of 9.2 assumes a recovery that may not materialize.
For a company with negative equity, the P/E ratio is not a reliable valuation metric because the earnings base is unstable and the equity base is inverted. Instead, investors should use EV/EBITDA, which at 8.5 is more comparable to peers, but even this must be adjusted for the high leverage and non-recurring items. A more appropriate metric would be FFO to debt or cash flow return on invested capital, which better captures the company's ability to service its debt and fund its operations.