Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 9.9x · EV/EBITDA 8.5x · ROE 23.3%. (2004–2025 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 | $8.2B | $10.3B | $13.3B | $8.6B | $5.1B | $7.6B | $6.5B | $12.6B | $9.5B | $12.2B | $9.7B |
| Enterprise Value | $22.6B | $24.7B | $27.0B | $22.2B | $17.8B | $18.5B | $15.0B | $19.2B | $15.8B | $18.4B | $16.0B |
| P/E Ratio → | 9.91 | 24.80 | 13.61 | 51.38 | — | — | — | 13.58 | 9.97 | 16.09 | 15.30 |
| P/S Ratio | 0.81 | 1.04 | 1.40 | 1.00 | 1.06 | 11.70 | 5.06 | 1.96 | 1.57 | 2.27 | 1.99 |
| P/B Ratio | 3.73 | 4.64 | 9.30 | 28.47 | 74.91 | 3.12 | 1.49 | 1.94 | 1.60 | 2.13 | 2.14 |
| P/FCF | — | — | 15.80 | — | — | — | — | 68.19 | 18.71 | 57.25 | 65.66 |
| P/OCF | 3.94 | 4.91 | 6.46 | 4.27 | 24.46 | — | — | 6.94 | 4.58 | 7.71 | 7.82 |
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 | — | 2.51 | 2.85 | 2.60 | 3.68 | 28.58 | 11.71 | 2.97 | 2.62 | 3.40 | 3.27 |
| EV / EBITDA | 8.48 | 8.95 | 11.06 | 12.25 | — | — | — | 10.52 | 8.87 | 11.69 | 11.64 |
| EV / EBIT | 14.20 | 9.27 | 17.75 | 24.95 | — | — | — | 16.42 | 12.79 | 17.63 | 17.33 |
| EV / FCF | — | — | 32.16 | — | — | — | — | 103.50 | 31.16 | 85.97 | 108.15 |
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 | 32.0% | 32.0% | 40.0% | 36.0% | 11.9% | -148.2% | -32.3% | 43.3% | 44.2% | 43.2% | 41.5% |
| Operating Margin | 16.2% | 16.2% | 15.5% | 10.9% | -32.0% | -393.9% | -272.2% | 18.2% | 20.1% | 19.4% | 19.0% |
| Net Profit Margin | 4.3% | 4.3% | 9.6% | 1.9% | -46.9% | -695.5% | -313.5% | 14.4% | 15.8% | 14.1% | 13.0% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 23.3% | 23.3% | 105.5% | 90.0% | -181.5% | -132.8% | -73.8% | 14.9% | 16.3% | 14.8% | 15.2% |
| ROA | 2.0% | 2.0% | 4.6% | 0.9% | -12.2% | -24.3% | -22.9% | 5.8% | 6.5% | 5.6% | 5.0% |
| ROIC | 7.5% | 7.5% | 7.6% | 5.2% | -8.9% | -14.6% | -20.2% | 7.0% | 7.6% | 6.9% | 6.7% |
| ROCE | 10.2% | 10.2% | 10.6% | 6.9% | -10.9% | -16.2% | -23.6% | 9.4% | 10.3% | 9.4% | 9.0% |
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 | 6.61 | 6.61 | 9.76 | 46.74 | 198.59 | 5.12 | 2.71 | 1.04 | 1.09 | 1.10 | 1.41 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 5.30 | 5.30 | 5.70 | 7.75 | — | — | — | 3.73 | 3.63 | 4.02 | 4.67 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 6.51 | 9.63 | 45.40 | 184.78 | 4.50 | 1.95 | 1.01 | 1.06 | 1.07 | 1.38 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 5.23 | 5.23 | 5.63 | 7.53 | — | — | — | 3.59 | 3.54 | 3.90 | 4.57 |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | 16.36 | — | — | — | — | 35.32 | 12.45 | 28.72 | 42.49 |
| Interest Coverage | 1.19 | 1.19 | 2.03 | 1.22 | -1.84 | -1.17 | -7.29 | 4.54 | 4.58 | 3.89 | 3.33 |
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 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.17 | 0.22 | 0.37 | 0.89 | 1.86 | 0.20 | 0.17 | 0.21 | 0.18 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.15 | 0.19 | 0.34 | 0.85 | 1.82 | 0.18 | 0.15 | 0.18 | 0.15 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.19 | 0.47 | 1.72 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.06 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.44 | 0.47 | 0.44 | 0.26 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.39 | 0.40 | 0.38 | 0.38 |
| Inventory Turnover | 48.39 | 48.39 | 38.00 | 34.69 | 28.69 | 13.60 | 20.55 | 38.39 | 37.44 | 37.31 | 43.02 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 10.83 | 8.53 | 11.96 | 24.59 | 657.62 | 5.87 | 4.24 | 3.33 | 2.97 | 4.73 |
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 | 10.1% | 4.0% | 7.3% | 1.9% | — | — | — | 7.4% | 10.0% | 6.2% | 6.5% |
| FCF Yield | — | — | 6.3% | — | — | — | — | 1.5% | 5.3% | 1.7% | 1.5% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.3% | 0.2% | 0.2% | 0.3% | 0.4% | 0.2% | 0.2% | 2.9% | 7.1% | 0.0% | 0.5% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.3% | 0.2% | 0.2% | 0.3% | 0.4% | 0.2% | 0.2% | 2.9% | 7.1% | 0.0% | 0.5% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $460M | $515M | $427M | $420M | $365M | $255M | $216M | $224M | $230M | $228M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 22 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 NCLH stock.
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.'s current P/E ratio is 9.9x. The historical average is 27.7x.
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.'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 12.8x.
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.'s return on equity (ROE) is 23.3%. This is above the typical threshold of 15-20% considered good for most companies. The historical average is -4.6%.
Based on historical data, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. is trading at a P/E of 9.9x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. has 32.0% gross margin and 16.2% operating margin. Operating margin between 10-20% is typical for established companies.
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 5.3x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Leverage and thin liquidity buffer
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Discounted Multiples Reflect Leverage Concerns
Based on NCLH's current figures, the trailing P/E of 19.73 and forward P/E of 10.91 imply a sharp expected earnings rebound, while EV/EBITDA of 8.23 sits well below the 16.62 reported for Royal Caribbean in the peer set.
The gap between trailing and forward P/E suggests the market is pricing in an earnings recovery that has not yet appeared in reported quarterly results. The discount to Royal Caribbean on EV/EBITDA is likely tied to NCLH's much higher leverage, given debt-to-EBITDA ranging widely across the recent quarters. Investors should monitor whether forward earnings estimates are sustained, since the multiple compression depends heavily on that recovery materializing.
Margin Recovery Remains Uneven and Seasonal
According to NCLH's reported quarterly figures, operating margin ranged from 8.3% in 2025Q4 to 25.5% in 2025Q3, while gross margin stayed between 38.0% and 47.1%, a spread that points to strong seasonality rather than steady expansion.
The wide swing in operating margin relative to a comparatively stable gross margin band suggests that operating costs and fixed fleet expenses drive most of the variability in earnings power. Gross margin also trails the peer group reported figures, which may indicate a structural pricing or cost disadvantage rather than a temporary one. Earnings power should therefore be judged on a trailing or normalized basis rather than on any single peak quarter.
Returns Recovering From a Thin Base
Based on reported figures, ROIC improved to 2.6% in 2026Q3 from 1.0% in 2026Q1, yet remains far below the 8.9% to 37.1% range reported for the peer set, suggesting returns on a heavy fleet base are still compressed.
The recent ROIC improvement appears driven more by seasonal profit concentration than by a durable shift in capital efficiency, given the sharp quarter-to-quarter volatility. Because the asset base is dominated by fleet investment, returns are highly sensitive to utilization and pricing, which may keep them structurally below peers. Investors should monitor whether ROIC can hold above its recent levels across a full cycle before drawing conclusions about compounding.
Debt Service Coverage Remains Stretched
As reported in NCLH's quarterly statements, total debt of $15.1B against cash of $256.5M and an interest coverage ratio of 3.84 in 2026Q3 suggests debt service comfort depends heavily on seasonal earnings concentration.
Debt-to-EBITDA has compressed from extreme levels, yet the reported figures still show leverage well above what a conservative cruise operator would typically carry. The interest coverage ratio fell to 1.03 in 2025Q4, indicating that during weaker quarters earnings barely covered interest obligations. Refinancing and maturity profile warrant further investigation, since the thin cash buffer leaves limited room to absorb a downturn.
Thin Liquidity Leaves Little Shock Absorption
Based on NCLH's reported figures, the current ratio of 0.22 and quick ratio of 0.19 in 2026Q3 indicate short-term obligations substantially exceed liquid assets, a position that may limit flexibility under severe operating stress.
The current and quick ratios are nearly identical, which suggests inventory is not the source of the gap; the shortfall reflects the scale of current liabilities, including customer deposits and near-term debt, relative to cash. A position this thin would likely depend on continued access to customer prepayments and financing markets during any downturn. Stress scenarios should be modeled explicitly rather than assumed to be manageable.
Peak Quarter Ratios May Overstate Durability
Based on NCLH's reported figures, the 17.2% ROE and 43.4% gross margin in 2026Q3 reflect a single seasonal peak, and annualizing these quarterly ratios could overstate the company's sustainable return profile.
The wide quarterly dispersion in ROE, ranging from negative territory to above 50% in 2024Q3, suggests that headline ratios are highly sensitive to the chosen period and may mislead if read in isolation. Relying on the most favorable quarter would likely overstate normalized earnings power given the cyclical concentration of cruise revenue. Trailing or multi-year averages, adjusted for the thin equity base, would provide a more defensible view of durable returns.