Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 33.6x · EV/EBITDA 24.2x · ROE 209.9%. (2001–2025 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 | $491.2B | $512.7B | $488.1B | $403.5B | $337.6B | $356.4B | $359.1B | $305.2B | $197.5B | $162.3B | $113.7B |
| Enterprise Value | $499.6B | $521.1B | $497.9B | $410.6B | $344.7B | $362.9B | $361.6B | $306.7B | $197.2B | $161.7B | $112.1B |
| P/E Ratio → | 33.65 | 34.56 | 37.91 | 36.05 | 33.99 | 41.02 | 56.03 | 37.61 | 33.69 | 41.47 | 27.98 |
| P/S Ratio | 15.32 | 15.99 | 17.74 | 16.45 | 15.51 | 19.32 | 24.07 | 18.32 | 13.38 | 13.15 | 10.64 |
| P/B Ratio | 64.44 | 66.18 | 74.92 | 57.66 | 52.95 | 48.09 | 55.10 | 50.94 | 35.98 | 29.14 | 20.00 |
| P/FCF | 29.04 | 30.31 | 34.12 | 34.76 | 33.44 | 41.21 | 55.11 | 40.93 | 34.54 | 31.62 | 27.71 |
| P/OCF | 28.23 | 29.46 | 33.03 | 33.68 | 30.16 | 37.67 | 49.71 | 37.29 | 31.74 | 29.21 | 25.35 |
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 | — | 16.25 | 18.09 | 16.74 | 15.83 | 19.67 | 24.24 | 18.41 | 13.35 | 13.10 | 10.50 |
| EV / EBITDA | 24.19 | 25.23 | 30.22 | 27.73 | 26.48 | 33.58 | 41.76 | 30.11 | 25.47 | 22.91 | 18.28 |
| EV / EBIT | 25.60 | 27.00 | 31.32 | 28.89 | 28.24 | 33.80 | 44.43 | 30.81 | 26.68 | 24.23 | 19.53 |
| EV / FCF | — | 30.81 | 34.80 | 35.37 | 34.13 | 41.96 | 55.50 | 41.14 | 34.48 | 31.52 | 27.34 |
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 | 77.9% | 77.9% | 76.3% | 76.0% | 76.3% | 76.2% | 75.3% | 79.0% | 78.5% | 78.5% | 79.4% |
| Operating Margin | 59.5% | 59.5% | 55.3% | 55.8% | 55.2% | 53.4% | 52.8% | 57.2% | 48.7% | 53.0% | 53.5% |
| Net Profit Margin | 45.6% | 45.6% | 45.7% | 44.6% | 44.7% | 46.0% | 41.9% | 48.1% | 39.2% | 31.3% | 37.7% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 209.9% | 209.9% | 190.6% | 167.4% | 144.0% | 124.7% | 102.5% | 141.4% | 106.0% | 69.6% | 69.1% |
| ROA | 29.3% | 29.3% | 28.4% | 27.6% | 26.0% | 24.4% | 20.4% | 30.0% | 25.4% | 19.6% | 23.2% |
| ROIC | 56.9% | 56.9% | 49.3% | 48.8% | 44.1% | 37.3% | 36.0% | 55.0% | 47.9% | 45.4% | 42.8% |
| ROCE | 64.8% | 64.8% | 56.6% | 55.2% | 50.0% | 43.6% | 41.4% | 63.2% | 56.4% | 55.2% | 53.7% |
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 | 2.45 | 2.45 | 2.80 | 2.24 | 2.20 | 1.88 | 1.94 | 1.42 | 1.15 | 0.97 | 0.91 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 0.92 | 0.92 | 1.11 | 1.06 | 1.08 | 1.29 | 1.46 | 0.84 | 0.82 | 0.77 | 0.84 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 1.09 | 1.50 | 1.01 | 1.10 | 0.87 | 0.39 | 0.26 | -0.06 | -0.09 | -0.27 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 0.41 | 0.41 | 0.59 | 0.48 | 0.54 | 0.60 | 0.30 | 0.15 | -0.04 | -0.07 | -0.25 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 0.50 | 0.68 | 0.61 | 0.69 | 0.75 | 0.39 | 0.21 | -0.06 | -0.10 | -0.38 |
| Interest Coverage | 26.73 | 26.73 | 24.61 | 24.72 | 25.91 | 24.91 | 21.42 | 44.44 | 39.73 | 43.35 | 60.43 |
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 | 1.03 | 1.03 | 1.03 | 1.17 | 1.17 | 1.29 | 1.61 | 1.42 | 1.39 | 1.57 | 1.84 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.03 | 1.03 | 1.03 | 1.17 | 1.17 | 1.29 | 1.61 | 1.42 | 1.39 | 1.57 | 1.84 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.46 | 0.46 | 0.44 | 0.53 | 0.49 | 0.56 | 0.85 | 0.59 | 0.58 | 0.67 | 0.93 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.61 | 0.59 | 0.59 | 0.57 | 0.50 | 0.46 | 0.58 | 0.60 | 0.59 | 0.58 |
| 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 | 0.6% | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.6% | 0.5% | 0.4% | 0.4% | 0.5% | 0.6% | 0.7% |
| Payout Ratio | 18.4% | 18.4% | 19.0% | 19.3% | 19.2% | 20.0% | 25.0% | 16.6% | 17.8% | 24.1% | 20.6% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 3.0% | 2.9% | 2.6% | 2.8% | 2.9% | 2.4% | 1.8% | 2.7% | 3.0% | 2.4% | 3.6% |
| FCF Yield | 3.4% | 3.3% | 2.9% | 2.9% | 3.0% | 2.4% | 1.8% | 2.4% | 2.9% | 3.2% | 3.6% |
| Buyback Yield | 2.4% | 2.3% | 2.3% | 2.2% | 2.6% | 1.7% | 1.2% | 2.1% | 2.5% | 2.3% | 3.1% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 2.9% | 2.8% | 2.8% | 2.8% | 3.2% | 2.1% | 1.7% | 2.6% | 3.0% | 2.9% | 3.8% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $898M | $927M | $946M | $971M | $992M | $1.0B | $1.0B | $1.0B | $1.1B | $1.1B |
Includes 30+ ratios · 25 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.
Bull/bear thesis, analyst target revisions, and earnings execution.
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 MA stock.
Mastercard Incorporated's current P/E ratio is 33.6x. The historical average is 32.4x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Mastercard Incorporated's current EV/EBITDA is 24.2x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 23.8x.
Mastercard Incorporated's return on equity (ROE) is 209.9%. This is above the typical threshold of 15-20% considered good for most companies. The historical average is 69.2%.
Based on historical data, Mastercard Incorporated is trading at a P/E of 33.6x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Mastercard Incorporated's current dividend yield is 0.55% with a payout ratio of 18.4%.
Mastercard Incorporated has 77.9% gross margin and 59.5% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Mastercard Incorporated's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 0.9x, indicating low leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Regulatory and cost pressures
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Premium Multiple for Network Moat
Mastercard trades at 34.6x trailing earnings and 66.2x book, a premium to Visa's 35.9x P/E and 19.0x P/B, reflecting its perceived growth edge in value-added services and real-time payments, per recent market data.
The P/B of 66.2x is distorted by the minimal equity base (equity/assets only 9.7%), making P/E and P/TBV more meaningful. The forward P/E of 28.9x implies the market expects sustained double-digit earnings growth, likely driven by cross-border recovery and VAS expansion. Relative to Visa, the slight P/E discount may reflect recent EPS miss concerns, but the PEG of 1.65 suggests growth is not fully priced in.
ROE Surge Masks Leverage Dynamics
ROE reached 71.2% in Q2 2026, up from 42.1% in Q1 2024, driven by a shrinking equity base from aggressive buybacks, as equity/assets fell to 9.7%, according to quarterly reports.
The DuPont decomposition shows ROE is amplified by extreme financial leverage (equity multiplier ~10x), not operational improvement alone. ROA of 8.0% is exceptionally high, reflecting the asset-light model with 100% fee income. However, the negative NIM (-0.4%) confirms no interest income contribution; profitability hinges on fee yields and cost control. The Q2 efficiency ratio spike to 36.4% from 16.6% in Q1 warrants monitoring as it may signal rising incentive costs or investment spend.
Efficiency Spike Clouds Margin Strength
Mastercard's efficiency ratio jumped to 36.4% in Q2 2026 from 16.6% in Q1, a significant cost increase that contributed to the EPS miss, despite 14% revenue growth, as reported in earnings releases.
The negative NIM is structural, given the fee-based model, so the focus is on the efficiency ratio. The Q2 spike suggests either higher rebates and incentives to issuers or increased operating expenses, possibly related to VAS investments. If this is a one-off, margins remain strong; if sustained, it could compress the 83.4% gross margin. Investors should track the ratio of incentives to gross dollar volume to assess competitive pressure.
Thin Equity Base Limits Flexibility
Equity-to-assets fell to 9.7% in Q2 2026 from 15.4% a year earlier, as buybacks outpaced retained earnings, leaving a thin capital cushion, based on balance sheet data.
While Mastercard is not a traditional bank and does not face regulatory capital requirements, the declining equity base reduces financial flexibility. The reported debt/equity of 2.45% appears understated, as the company likely carries more debt for buybacks; the actual leverage may be higher. This could constrain future capital return if earnings growth slows, but the robust cash flow generation (OCF $3.9B/quarter) provides a buffer.
Minimal Credit Risk, Provision Volatility
Mastercard's loan book is minimal, but provision expenses spiked to $1.9B in Q1 2026, then stabilized at $1.7B in Q2, suggesting potential credit-related charges, as per financial statements.
The provisions are likely for consumer credit exposure through its services, but the lack of a traditional loan book means asset quality metrics like NPLs are not applicable. The volatility in provisions may reflect changes in economic outlook or specific client exposures. Given the fee-based model, credit risk is secondary; the main risk is regulatory and operational.
Visa Gap Narrows on Growth
Mastercard's ROE of 71.2% far exceeds Visa's 61.3%, but its P/E of 34.6x is slightly below Visa's 35.9x, indicating the market sees similar growth prospects, per peer data.
Mastercard's higher ROE is partly due to more aggressive buybacks, not necessarily superior operations. Its net margin is likely higher than Visa's (not shown), but the efficiency ratio spike suggests cost pressures. The structural advantage in real-time payments and VAS could justify a premium, but the recent EPS miss may temper that. The gap in P/B (66.2x vs 18.96x) is misleading due to equity base differences; P/E is the better comparison.
P/E Distorted by Provision Volatility
The most misapplied ratio for Mastercard is P/E, as provision expenses and one-time costs can cause earnings swings, obscuring underlying fee-based profitability, according to recent financial data.
Investors should use P/TBV or EV/EBITDA (though not ideal) to value the network, but P/E is common. The Q2 EPS miss was partly due to cost spikes, not demand weakness, so trailing P/E may understate value. A better metric is price-to-operating cash flow, which is robust, or forward P/E adjusted for normalized costs. Additionally, the negative tangible book value (Tang BV/Sh negative) makes P/B meaningless; focus on earnings power and free cash flow yield.