Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -60.3x · EV/EBITDA N/A · ROE -9.5%. (2020–2024 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $46M | — | — | — | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $42M | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -60.33 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 37.05 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 6.01 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | -14.6% | -14.6% | 56.3% | 34.1% | 83.9% | 79.6% |
| Operating Margin | -74.2% | -74.2% | -33.2% | -5.4% | 59.2% | 57.8% |
| Net Profit Margin | -56.7% | -56.7% | -27.4% | -4.9% | 49.9% | 50.5% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -9.5% | -9.5% | -8.5% | -1.0% | 27.5% | 23.9% |
| ROA | -6.2% | -6.2% | -5.2% | -0.8% | 22.2% | 17.7% |
| ROIC | -9.1% | -9.1% | -7.6% | -0.8% | 23.9% | 19.6% |
| ROCE | -12.4% | -12.4% | -10.3% | -1.1% | 32.4% | 26.8% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.05 |
| Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | 0.04 | 0.17 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.52 | -0.18 | -0.13 | -0.11 | -0.29 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | -0.42 | -0.98 |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | -1.07 | -0.29 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | — | — | — | — | — | 479.97 |
Net cash position: cash ($31M) exceeds total debt ($2M)
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 4.16 | 4.16 | 2.24 | 2.84 | 6.19 | 3.86 |
| Quick Ratio | 4.16 | 4.16 | 2.24 | 2.84 | 6.19 | 3.86 |
| Cash Ratio | 1.97 | 1.97 | 0.26 | 0.30 | 0.63 | 1.04 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.16 | 0.34 | 0.35 |
| 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 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $14M | $14M | $14M | $17M | $17M |
Persistent operational cash burn
Based on reported figures, PLUT trades at a P/S multiple of 37.04, which appears disconnected from its negative earnings profile and suggests the market is pricing the firm as a distressed asset or potential shell rather than a viable, growing financial services provider in the Hong Kong market.
The P/E of -60.32 confirms that investors are currently unable to anchor the valuation to any positive earnings power. This valuation gap relative to peers suggests that the market is assigning a premium to the company's regulatory licenses and cash reserves, effectively ignoring the underlying operational losses.
As reported in financial statements, the firm's profitability has collapsed, with operating margins reaching -74.19% in recent periods, a stark reversal from the 59.0% margin seen in 2021Q4, indicating that the current cost structure is fundamentally misaligned with the firm's diminished revenue-generating capacity in the current market.
The negative gross margin of -14.60% suggests that the direct costs of executing trades and providing financial services now exceed the revenue generated, which is a critical red flag for any brokerage. This implies that the firm is effectively paying to maintain its market presence, which is unsustainable without a significant pivot in business model or scale.
According to historical data, ROIC has deteriorated from a positive 5.3% in 2021Q4 to -6.9% in 2025Q1, reflecting a consistent destruction of shareholder capital as the firm fails to generate returns that exceed its cost of capital while navigating a highly challenging and cyclical Hong Kong financial environment.
The transition from positive to negative returns on invested capital highlights the firm's inability to deploy its balance sheet effectively. Investors should monitor whether management can stabilize these returns, as the current trend suggests that every dollar of capital invested is currently eroding the firm's long-term intrinsic value.
Based on recent financial filings, the asset turnover ratio has plummeted to 0.02, a significant decline from the 0.10 observed in 2021Q4, which suggests that the firm's assets are becoming increasingly unproductive as the brokerage and advisory business lines fail to generate meaningful transaction volume or fee income.
This low turnover ratio indicates that the firm is holding a large asset base relative to its revenue, which is typical of a business that has lost its competitive edge. The lack of efficiency in converting assets into revenue suggests that the firm's current operational footprint is far too large for its actual market demand.
As noted in recent financial disclosures, the P/B ratio of 6.01 is frequently misapplied to PLUT, as it fails to account for the fact that the firm's book value is heavily comprised of cash and intangible licenses rather than productive, income-generating assets that drive long-term shareholder value.
Investors should instead focus on the net cash position relative to the burn rate, as the P/B ratio provides a false sense of security regarding the firm's asset quality. Relying on book value in this context ignores the reality that the firm's core operations are currently destroying the very capital that the P/B ratio purports to measure.
Includes 30+ ratios · 5 years · Updated daily
DCF models, multiple analysis, and analyst estimates.
10-year return with dividends reinvested.
See how regular investing compounds over time.
Compare growth, multiples, and margins vs sector.
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying PLUT stock.
Plutus Financial Group Limited's current P/E ratio is -60.3x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Plutus Financial Group Limited's return on equity (ROE) is -9.5%. The historical average is 6.5%.
Based on historical data, Plutus Financial Group Limited is trading at a P/E of -60.3x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Plutus Financial Group Limited has -14.6% gross margin and -74.2% operating margin.