Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 20.5x · EV/EBITDA 6.6x · ROE 7.3%. (2015–2025 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 | $3.0B | $3.1B | $3.4B | $3.2B | $3.0B | $1.7B | $879M | $1.2B | $1.5B | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $3.8B | $3.9B | $3.9B | $3.6B | $3.3B | $1.9B | $1.0B | $1.3B | $1.5B | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 20.49 | 20.74 | 10.64 | 5.76 | 7.59 | — | — | 15.66 | 12.10 | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 0.74 | 0.77 | 0.78 | 0.67 | 0.73 | 0.68 | 0.91 | 0.59 | 0.71 | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 1.46 | 1.47 | 1.70 | 1.74 | 2.02 | 1.37 | 0.67 | 1.50 | 2.06 | — | — |
| P/FCF | 211.03 | 217.29 | 18.89 | 7.78 | 42.67 | — | — | 17.75 | 16.51 | — | — |
| P/OCF | 4.88 | 5.03 | 4.06 | 3.15 | 5.72 | 12.46 | 10.29 | 4.48 | 4.34 | — | — |
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 | — | 0.98 | 0.90 | 0.75 | 0.80 | 0.77 | 1.06 | 0.64 | 0.71 | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 6.57 | 6.72 | 4.37 | 3.03 | 3.99 | 19.08 | 28.45 | 4.58 | 3.50 | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 47.02 | 16.61 | 8.91 | 4.67 | 7.90 | — | — | 11.89 | 4.98 | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 277.25 | 21.77 | 8.67 | 46.97 | — | — | 19.19 | 16.55 | — | — |
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% | 14.1% | 20.6% | 16.3% | -1.7% | -7.5% | 10.2% | 18.6% | 17.5% | -5.7% |
| Operating Margin | 2.0% | 2.0% | 8.9% | 16.0% | 12.4% | -6.6% | -14.9% | 5.6% | 14.5% | 12.2% | -15.2% |
| Net Profit Margin | 3.7% | 3.7% | 7.3% | 11.7% | 9.6% | -7.3% | -12.0% | 2.0% | 5.9% | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 7.3% | 7.3% | 16.5% | 33.3% | 29.3% | -14.1% | -11.1% | 5.1% | 21.5% | — | — |
| ROA | 4.3% | 4.3% | 10.0% | 19.8% | 17.3% | -9.1% | -7.3% | 3.3% | 12.8% | — | — |
| ROIC | 2.3% | 2.3% | 12.3% | 28.3% | 23.7% | -8.4% | -9.3% | 10.2% | 34.5% | 29.0% | -15.0% |
| ROCE | 3.0% | 3.0% | 15.3% | 35.1% | 30.3% | -10.8% | -11.3% | 11.6% | 40.9% | 38.1% | -21.1% |
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 | 0.42 | 0.42 | 0.27 | 0.22 | 0.23 | 0.20 | 0.16 | 0.27 | 0.14 | 0.45 | 0.45 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 1.50 | 1.50 | 0.60 | 0.34 | 0.42 | 2.43 | 5.89 | 0.75 | 0.24 | 0.75 | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.41 | 0.26 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.18 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.00 | 0.41 | 0.40 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 1.45 | 1.45 | 0.58 | 0.31 | 0.36 | 2.23 | 3.97 | 0.34 | 0.01 | 0.69 | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | 59.97 | 2.88 | 0.90 | 4.30 | — | — | 1.43 | 0.03 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 5.84 | 5.84 | 13.34 | 25.92 | 18.59 | -10.39 | -11.97 | 6.09 | 17.90 | 14.34 | -8.89 |
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 | 1.22 | 1.22 | 1.27 | 1.49 | 1.47 | 1.11 | 1.59 | 1.83 | 2.10 | 1.60 | 1.32 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 1.17 | 1.14 | 0.87 | 1.26 | 1.50 | 1.83 | 1.34 | 1.11 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.19 | 0.42 | 0.47 | 0.07 | 0.09 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 1.13 | 1.31 | 1.57 | 1.61 | 1.21 | 0.51 | 1.55 | 1.93 | 1.75 | 0.83 |
| Inventory Turnover | 18.86 | 18.86 | 18.21 | 18.32 | 16.19 | 18.67 | 8.76 | 20.18 | 29.22 | 22.13 | 14.07 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 55.16 | 45.66 | 45.16 | 51.55 | 60.19 | 127.99 | 46.38 | 42.00 | 63.40 | 125.21 |
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 | 1.8% | 1.8% | 1.4% | 1.2% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.5% | 1.3% | 0.5% | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | 36.8% | 36.8% | 15.3% | 6.8% | 2.3% | — | — | 37.9% | 5.5% | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 4.9% | 4.8% | 9.4% | 17.4% | 13.2% | — | — | 6.4% | 8.3% | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 0.5% | 0.5% | 5.3% | 12.9% | 2.3% | — | — | 5.6% | 6.1% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.8% | 0.8% | 3.8% | 6.3% | 4.1% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 1.6% | 7.1% | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 2.6% | 2.6% | 5.3% | 7.5% | 4.4% | 0.2% | 0.5% | 2.8% | 7.6% | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $166M | $169M | $176M | $189M | $174M | $85M | $105M | $118M | $69M | $56M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 11 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 LBRT stock.
Liberty Energy Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 20.5x. The historical average is 12.1x. This places it at the 83th percentile of its historical range.
Liberty Energy Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 6.6x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 9.2x.
Liberty Energy Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 7.3%. The historical average is 9.0%.
Based on historical data, Liberty Energy Inc. is trading at a P/E of 20.5x. This is at the 83th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Liberty Energy Inc.'s current dividend yield is 1.80% with a payout ratio of 36.8%.
Liberty Energy Inc. has 11.4% gross margin and 2.0% operating margin.
Liberty Energy Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 1.5x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Thin cash buffer amid capex surge
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Margin Volatility Masks Underlying Strain
Gross margin swung from 5.8% in 2025Q3 to 17.5% in 2026Q2, while operating margin remains near break-even at 1.1%, indicating pricing power is weak and cost pass-through is incomplete.
The extreme quarterly swings in gross margin—from 5.8% to 20.6% within four quarters—suggest that LBRT's pricing is highly sensitive to fleet utilization and spot market dynamics, rather than reflecting durable cost advantages. Operating margin of 1.1% in 2026Q2, despite a revenue beat, implies that the company is barely covering fixed costs, and the reported net margin of 3.6% is inflated by non-operating items, as net income exceeded operating income by $30.4M. This suggests that underlying earning power is strained, and the recent EPS beat may not be sustainable without a sustained improvement in service pricing.
Return on Capital Decays Sharply
ROIC fell from 4.6% in 2024Q2 to 0.3% in 2026Q2, while ROE dropped from 5.7% to 2.2%, indicating that capital deployed in fleet expansion is not yet generating adequate returns.
The decline in ROIC from 4.6% to 0.3% over eight quarters reflects both margin compression and a 45% expansion in total assets, driven by a $600M increase in PPE. This suggests that LBRT is investing heavily in electric fleets and sand mines ahead of demand, but the current revenue contraction means these assets are underutilized, leading to a decay in returns on invested capital. The gap between ROE (2.2%) and ROIC (0.3%) indicates that financial leverage is amplifying returns, but the low absolute levels suggest that the capital base is not yet earning its cost of capital, a trend investors should monitor as the fleet transition progresses.
Working Capital Efficiency Deteriorates
Cash conversion cycle lengthened to 38 days in 2026Q2 from 20 days in 2025Q4, driven by slower collections (DSO up to 57) and extended inventory holding, while DPO fell, indicating reduced supplier leverage.
The CCC expansion from 20 to 38 days over two quarters is driven by a 5-day increase in DSO and a 16-day drop in DPO, suggesting that LBRT is collecting receivables more slowly while paying suppliers faster, which strains cash flow. This deterioration in working capital efficiency is particularly concerning given the negative FCF margin of -7.6% in 2026Q2, as it implies that operational cash generation is being hindered by balance sheet timing. The asset turnover of 0.27x, down from 0.37x in 2024Q2, indicates that the expanded asset base is not yet generating proportional revenue, reinforcing the view that efficiency gains are lagging the capital build-out.
Leverage Surge Tests Balance Sheet Flexibility
Debt-to-equity jumped from 0.24 in 2024Q2 to 0.82 in 2026Q2, while interest coverage fell from 18.5x to 3.8x, indicating that debt service is becoming less comfortable despite still-low absolute leverage.
The fourfold increase in D/E and the collapse in interest coverage from 18.5x to 3.8x over eight quarters reflect a deliberate shift to debt financing for the electric fleet transition, but the rapid pace raises concerns about near-term liquidity. With D/EBITDA at 12.7x in 2026Q2, up from 1.8x in 2024Q2, the company's earnings are now far less capable of servicing debt, and any further margin pressure could strain covenant compliance. While the absolute D/E of 0.82 remains manageable, the trajectory suggests that LBRT is becoming more leveraged just as revenue contracts, and investors should monitor whether the fleet modernization generates sufficient returns to restore coverage ratios.
Liquidity Ratios Mask Thin Cash Buffer
Current ratio improved to 1.99 in 2026Q2, but cash dropped to $27.5M, and quick ratio of 1.75 relies on receivables, indicating that the liquidity position is less robust than the ratio suggests.
The current ratio of 1.99 appears healthy, but the extremely low cash balance of $27.5M against $4B revenue highlights a reliance on receivables and inventory to meet short-term obligations, which could be problematic if collections slow. The quick ratio of 1.75 is supported by receivables, but the 57-day DSO suggests that cash conversion is not immediate, and the negative FCF margin of -7.6% indicates that operations are not generating cash to replenish the buffer. Under a severe stress scenario—such as a further 10% revenue decline—the thin cash position could force LBRT to draw on its revolver or curtail capital returns, making liquidity a key risk to monitor.
Misapplied EV/EBITDA in Cyclical Downturn
EV/EBITDA of 6.89 appears cheap, but with EBITDA near trough levels and D/EBITDA at 12.7x, this multiple overstates value; a normalized earnings approach is more appropriate for LBRT's cyclical model.
The EV/EBITDA multiple of 6.89 is misleading because EBITDA is currently depressed due to the cyclical downturn, making the multiple appear artificially low; in 2024Q2, when EBITDA was near peak, the multiple would have been far lower, suggesting that the market is pricing in a recovery that may not materialize. Additionally, the D/EBITDA of 12.7x indicates that leverage is high relative to current earnings, and using EV/EBITDA without adjusting for the cycle can understate risk. Instead, investors should use a mid-cycle EBITDA estimate or a price-to-normalized earnings approach, which would better reflect LBRT's earning power across the cycle and avoid the trap of valuing the company on trough earnings.