Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -15.7x · EV/EBITDA 10.0x · ROE -148.6%. (2013–2025 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 | $2.5B | $2.1B | $1.5B | $1.7B | $2.7B | $2.9B | $3.1B | $3.7B | $3.6B | $3.0B | $2.3B |
| Enterprise Value | $3.7B | $3.3B | $2.9B | $3.2B | $4.2B | $3.9B | $4.2B | $4.9B | $4.2B | $3.4B | $2.8B |
| P/E Ratio → | -15.71 | — | — | — | 12.81 | 24.31 | 17.33 | 20.09 | 21.08 | 23.73 | 66.10 |
| P/S Ratio | 2.16 | 1.83 | 1.05 | 1.02 | 1.62 | 2.06 | 2.59 | 2.85 | 3.15 | 3.08 | 2.55 |
| P/B Ratio | 88.26 | 72.13 | 7.58 | 2.73 | 3.88 | 4.26 | 4.90 | 6.95 | 10.50 | 10.27 | 16.32 |
| P/FCF | 9.21 | 7.83 | 29.02 | 18.08 | 15.86 | 15.16 | 12.76 | 22.92 | 22.55 | 24.61 | 32.59 |
| P/OCF | 7.60 | 6.47 | 11.51 | 8.40 | 8.65 | 9.79 | 8.93 | 13.37 | 14.15 | 17.18 | 18.14 |
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 | — | 2.83 | 2.04 | 1.87 | 2.50 | 2.82 | 3.48 | 3.76 | 3.73 | 3.45 | 3.05 |
| EV / EBITDA | 10.00 | 8.98 | 7.79 | 8.34 | 9.26 | 9.40 | 11.07 | 11.77 | 13.22 | 13.78 | 13.91 |
| EV / EBIT | 14.06 | — | — | 38.00 | 12.56 | 18.28 | 15.00 | 17.13 | 16.09 | 16.53 | 17.28 |
| EV / FCF | — | 12.09 | 56.21 | 33.18 | 24.36 | 20.69 | 17.17 | 30.20 | 26.75 | 27.54 | 38.92 |
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 | 39.5% | 39.5% | 32.3% | 27.9% | 34.2% | 36.9% | 38.3% | 37.3% | 36.8% | 33.8% | 30.2% |
| Operating Margin | 22.4% | 22.4% | 18.5% | 15.2% | 20.4% | 22.1% | — | 25.4% | 23.2% | 20.9% | 17.7% |
| Net Profit Margin | -14.3% | -14.3% | -30.6% | -0.3% | 12.7% | 8.5% | 14.9% | 14.2% | 14.9% | 13.0% | 3.9% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -148.6% | -148.6% | -104.1% | -0.8% | 30.8% | 17.9% | 30.9% | 42.2% | 53.6% | 58.2% | 10.6% |
| ROA | -9.1% | -9.1% | -18.5% | -0.2% | 8.1% | 4.9% | 8.1% | 10.6% | 15.1% | 14.3% | 4.4% |
| ROIC | 14.2% | 14.2% | 10.7% | 9.1% | 13.2% | 13.4% | — | 18.2% | 23.9% | 24.5% | 20.5% |
| ROCE | 17.1% | 17.1% | 12.9% | 10.9% | 14.7% | 14.3% | — | 21.4% | 27.6% | 27.6% | 23.2% |
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 | 41.84 | 41.84 | 7.45 | 2.43 | 2.19 | 1.96 | 2.09 | 2.31 | 2.18 | 1.52 | 3.38 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 3.37 | 3.37 | 3.95 | 4.05 | 3.40 | 3.17 | 3.52 | 2.98 | 2.32 | 1.83 | 2.42 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 39.21 | 7.10 | 2.28 | 2.08 | 1.56 | 1.69 | 2.21 | 1.95 | 1.22 | 3.17 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 3.16 | 3.16 | 3.77 | 3.79 | 3.23 | 2.51 | 2.84 | 2.84 | 2.07 | 1.46 | 2.26 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 4.26 | 27.19 | 15.10 | 8.51 | 5.53 | 4.41 | 7.28 | 4.20 | 2.93 | 6.33 |
| Interest Coverage | -0.89 | -0.89 | -4.48 | 0.89 | 5.36 | 4.15 | 5.99 | 5.08 | 7.92 | 11.20 | 8.31 |
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 | 1.15 | 1.15 | 1.87 | 1.81 | 2.25 | 2.70 | 2.81 | 2.15 | 2.31 | 2.40 | 2.16 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.60 | 0.60 | 1.01 | 0.96 | 1.15 | 1.80 | 1.97 | 1.16 | 1.26 | 1.36 | 1.05 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.23 | 0.23 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.25 | 1.02 | 1.15 | 0.26 | 0.42 | 0.57 | 0.22 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.71 | 0.70 | 0.65 | 0.61 | 0.56 | 0.52 | 0.60 | 0.86 | 1.05 | 1.09 |
| Inventory Turnover | 3.80 | 3.80 | 4.20 | 3.95 | 3.28 | 3.64 | 3.97 | 3.82 | 3.75 | 4.02 | 4.19 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 39.76 | 44.64 | 45.51 | 54.54 | 50.21 | 50.03 | 44.10 | 39.93 | 38.44 | 38.34 |
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 | — | — | — | — | 7.8% | 4.1% | 5.8% | 5.0% | 4.7% | 4.2% | 1.5% |
| FCF Yield | 10.9% | 12.8% | 3.4% | 5.5% | 6.3% | 6.6% | 7.8% | 4.4% | 4.4% | 4.1% | 3.1% |
| Buyback Yield | 2.2% | 2.6% | 0.0% | 5.3% | 5.4% | 3.8% | 2.8% | 0.2% | 1.3% | 0.2% | 0.0% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 2.2% | 2.6% | 0.0% | 5.3% | 5.4% | 3.8% | 2.8% | 0.2% | 1.3% | 0.2% | 0.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $36M | $36M | $36M | $38M | $40M | $42M | $42M | $43M | $43M | $42M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 13 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 NGVT stock.
Ingevity Corporation's current P/E ratio is -15.7x. The historical average is 26.5x.
Ingevity Corporation's current EV/EBITDA is 10.0x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 10.8x.
Ingevity Corporation's return on equity (ROE) is -148.6%. The historical average is 6.0%.
Based on historical data, Ingevity Corporation is trading at a P/E of -15.7x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Ingevity Corporation has 39.5% gross margin and 22.4% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Ingevity Corporation's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 3.4x, indicating high leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
EV transition and CTO costs
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Margin Recovery Masks Impairment Drag
Gross margin expanded to 44.3% in Q2 2026, the highest in ten quarters, yet net margin swung to 11.2% from -40.1% a year earlier, according to reported figures. This suggests operational pricing power is improving, but non-cash charges have historically distorted bottom-line profitability.
The gross margin expansion from 37.8% to 44.3% year-over-year indicates that Ingevity is successfully managing CTO input costs or passing through price increases, as COGS declined faster than revenue. However, the operating margin of 19.1% in Q2 2026, while healthy, is below the 23.5% posted a year earlier, reflecting the impact of lower volumes on fixed-cost absorption. The negative net margins in prior quarters were driven by large non-cash impairments, as evidenced by the gap between operating and net income; investors should focus on adjusted operating metrics to gauge true earning power.
ROIC Stability Amid Equity Erosion
ROIC has remained relatively stable between 1.7% and 4.5% over the past ten quarters, despite massive goodwill write-downs, according to balance sheet data. This suggests that the underlying operating asset base is generating consistent returns, though the near-total equity erosion distorts ROE.
ROIC of 3.8% in Q2 2026 is modest but consistent with the 3-4% range seen over the past two years, indicating that the company is not destroying value on its invested capital, but also not compounding returns. The stability in ROIC, despite revenue contraction, implies that management has been effective in reducing the asset base through divestitures or impairments, aligning capital with lower demand. However, ROE has been extremely volatile, swinging from -100.8% to 174.3% in recent quarters, which is a direct consequence of the shrinking equity base; this makes ROE an unreliable measure of performance for Ingevity.
Working Capital Stretch Signals Caution
The cash conversion cycle extended to 92 days in Q2 2026, up from 96 days a year earlier, driven by DIO of 93 days and DSO of 44 days, as per the latest data. This suggests that inventory levels remain elevated relative to sales, tying up cash in a period of revenue decline.
Inventory days on hand have remained stubbornly high, averaging over 100 days in the past year, which is consistent with a high fixed-cost manufacturing business that must maintain production continuity. The slight improvement in DSO to 44 days from 45 days indicates disciplined receivables management, but the overall CCC of 92 days is still elevated compared to the 104 days seen in Q2 2024. This suggests that working capital efficiency has not materially improved despite the revenue contraction, and the negative free cash flow margin of -7.7% in Q2 2026 highlights the cash drag from inventory buildup.
Leverage Spike Distorted by Equity Write-Downs
Debt-to-equity surged to 26.36 in Q2 2026 from 2.74 in Q1 2024, but total debt remained near $1.2 billion, according to balance sheet data. This indicates that the leverage ratio is inflated by the collapse in equity, not by additional borrowing, masking the true debt burden.
The near-total write-off of goodwill, from $525.9 million to $4.3 million, has artificially depressed equity, making the D/E ratio appear dangerously high. However, the absolute debt level has been stable, and interest coverage of 3.89x in Q2 2026, while improved from negative levels in prior quarters, remains thin relative to the cyclicality of earnings. Investors should monitor the company's ability to refinance its debt given the strained equity base and the potential for further impairments, but the underlying operational leverage is less severe than the ratio suggests.
Liquidity Buffer Thin but Improving
The current ratio improved to 1.61 in Q2 2026 from 1.27 a year earlier, with cash of $97.4 million, as per the balance sheet. This suggests a modest liquidity cushion, but the quick ratio of 1.15 indicates limited reliance on inventory to meet short-term obligations.
The improvement in the current ratio is driven by a reduction in current liabilities, likely from paydown of short-term debt, rather than a buildup of cash. However, the cash balance of $97.4 million is modest relative to the $1.2 billion in total debt, and the negative operating cash flow in Q2 2026 suggests that the company may need to rely on external financing or asset sales to fund its obligations. The quick ratio of 1.15 provides some comfort, but in a severe downturn, the company's ability to generate cash from inventory may be limited given the specialized nature of its products.
EV/EBITDA Misleads on Cyclicality
The trailing EV/EBITDA of 10.30 appears reasonable, but the forward EV/EBITDA of 41.01 suggests the market expects a sharp decline in EBITDA, according to valuation data. This ratio is commonly misapplied to Ingevity because it fails to capture the impact of non-cash impairments and the cyclicality of the automotive carbon business.
The wide gap between trailing and forward EV/EBITDA indicates that the market is pricing in a significant deterioration in earnings, likely due to the secular decline in ICE vehicles. However, EBITDA is heavily influenced by non-cash charges and one-time items, which can distort the multiple; for Ingevity, a more appropriate metric would be EV/EBIT or EV/adjusted operating income, which excludes the noise from impairments and restructuring. Additionally, the P/E ratio is meaningless given the negative earnings, so investors should focus on EV/Sales or EV/EBITDA on a normalized basis, adjusting for the recurring restructuring charges that have become a feature of the company's reporting.