Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -17.9x · EV/EBITDA N/A · ROE -35.0%. (2017–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $1.7B | $710M | $342M | $101M | $90M | $626M | $1.3B | $196M | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $1.7B | $626M | $295M | $92M | $50M | $579M | $1.2B | $143M | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -17.89 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 24.95 | 10.20 | 4.05 | 1.38 | 1.39 | 7.33 | 16.00 | 3.01 | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 5.56 | 2.72 | 1.69 | 0.78 | 0.41 | 2.02 | 6.46 | 1.84 | — | — |
| 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 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 8.99 | 3.49 | 1.25 | 0.77 | 6.77 | 15.27 | 2.20 | — | — |
| 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 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 22.7% | 22.7% | 31.7% | 24.8% | 20.5% | 37.0% | 25.6% | 33.9% | 31.3% | -24.9% |
| Operating Margin | -126.4% | -126.4% | -80.7% | -131.0% | -177.6% | -76.4% | -53.6% | -34.4% | -36.5% | -236.0% |
| Net Profit Margin | -116.7% | -116.7% | -96.1% | -147.4% | -174.2% | -76.3% | -52.5% | -38.5% | -52.6% | -251.2% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -35.0% | -35.0% | -48.9% | -62.3% | -42.9% | -25.8% | -27.4% | -16611.9% | — | — |
| ROA | -26.9% | -26.9% | -32.8% | -41.8% | -32.9% | -20.3% | -20.5% | -25.2% | -52.9% | -70.3% |
| ROIC | -39.7% | -39.7% | -37.1% | -48.5% | -39.3% | -24.5% | -33.1% | -31.3% | — | — |
| ROCE | -33.0% | -33.0% | -32.7% | -44.0% | -37.0% | -23.0% | -27.1% | -49.2% | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.37 | 0.22 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.02 | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.32 | -0.23 | -0.07 | -0.19 | -0.15 | -0.30 | -0.50 | — | — |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | -395.34 | -395.34 | -3385.08 | -982.75 | -562.56 | -353.41 | -20610.50 | -21.13 | -9.50 | -17.11 |
Net cash position: cash ($124M) exceeds total debt ($40M)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 6.76 | 6.76 | 6.52 | 3.11 | 6.03 | 10.16 | 5.43 | 2.79 | 0.51 | 0.55 |
| Quick Ratio | 6.61 | 6.61 | 6.39 | 2.99 | 5.83 | 10.03 | 5.37 | 2.77 | 0.47 | 0.53 |
| Cash Ratio | 6.05 | 6.05 | 5.94 | 2.42 | 5.06 | 9.17 | 5.00 | 2.57 | 0.34 | 0.46 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.21 | 0.31 | 0.33 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.32 | 0.41 | 0.91 | 0.28 |
| Inventory Turnover | 8.77 | 8.77 | 14.53 | 9.76 | 8.10 | 13.19 | 21.88 | 30.29 | 12.17 | 14.28 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 84.91 | 35.11 | 88.07 | 93.38 | 78.85 | 29.47 | 18.47 | 43.07 | 75.27 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $89M | $59M | $48M | $46M | $44M | $34M | $18M | $22M | $22M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 9 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 PSNL stock.
Personalis, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -17.9x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Personalis, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -35.0%. The historical average is -40.4%.
Based on historical data, Personalis, Inc. is trading at a P/E of -17.9x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Personalis, Inc. has 22.7% gross margin and -126.4% operating margin.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Cash burn and dilution risk
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Gross Margin Volatility Masks Structural Costs
Gross margin swung from 35.6% in Q2 2024 to 1.8% in Q1 2026, then recovered to 21.2% in Q2 2026, per reported financials, indicating persistent instability and a high fixed-cost base.
The extreme quarterly swings in gross margin—from 35.6% to 1.8% and back to 21.2%—suggest that revenue mix and utilization of the sequencing infrastructure are highly variable, likely due to the lumpy nature of biopharma contracts and the VA program. Operating margin deteriorated to -150.2% in Q2 2026, implying that even when gross margin recovers, operating expenses overwhelm revenue, reflecting a lack of operating leverage. This pattern suggests that the company's cost structure is not yet aligned with its revenue scale, and investors should monitor whether the recent clinical volume surge can translate into sustained margin improvement.
Persistent Negative Returns on Capital
ROIC has remained deeply negative, ranging from -7.9% to -12.6% over the past ten quarters, per reported figures, indicating that the company is not generating returns on its invested capital.
Despite a $120.7M equity raise in Q3 2025, ROIC has not improved, hovering around -12% in recent quarters. This suggests that the additional capital is being consumed by operating losses rather than generating productive returns. The negative ROIC is driven by both negative margins and low asset turnover (0.05-0.12), indicating that the asset base, including lab infrastructure, is not being utilized efficiently to generate revenue. Without a significant improvement in margins or asset turnover, the company will continue to erode shareholder value.
Working Capital Efficiency Shows Mixed Signals
Cash conversion cycle improved to 26 days in Q2 2026 from 48 days in Q1 2026, per reported data, but DSO remains elevated at 57 days, indicating ongoing collection challenges.
The improvement in CCC is primarily due to a sharp reduction in DSO from 85 days in Q1 2026 to 57 days in Q2 2026, which may reflect better collection efforts or a shift in revenue mix. However, DIO increased to 43 days, suggesting higher inventory levels, possibly due to reagent stocking. DPO remains high at 74 days, indicating the company is stretching supplier payments, which may be a liquidity management tactic. While the CCC is positive, the underlying volatility in DSO and DIO suggests that working capital management is not yet stable, and the company may face cash flow timing issues.
Low Leverage Masks Cash Burn Risk
Debt-to-equity improved to 0.16 in Q2 2026 from 0.39 in Q1 2024, per balance sheet data, but negative interest coverage of -855x indicates that operating losses far exceed interest expense.
The company's conservative leverage profile, with total debt of $38.0M and D/E of 0.16, suggests that debt service is not an immediate concern. However, the negative interest coverage ratio, which reflects operating losses, indicates that the company cannot service debt from operations. The modest debt level provides some cushion, but the ongoing cash burn of approximately $25-30M per quarter implies that the company will need to raise additional capital or achieve profitability before debt becomes a meaningful risk. Investors should monitor the cash runway, which appears to be roughly 3-4 quarters based on current cash levels.
Strong Liquidity Ratios Mask Short Runway
Current ratio stands at 5.28 in Q2 2026, per reported figures, but with operating cash flow consuming $25.8M in the same quarter, the cash runway appears limited to about three to four quarters.
The high current ratio, driven by $94.0M in cash and equivalents, suggests ample short-term liquidity. However, the rapid cash burn rate, which has accelerated to -$29.6M in FCF in Q2 2026, indicates that the liquidity position will deteriorate quickly without additional funding or a significant reduction in losses. The quick ratio of 5.08, which excludes inventory, confirms that the company is not reliant on inventory for liquidity. Nevertheless, the lack of forward guidance and the persistent negative cash flow suggest that the current liquidity is a temporary buffer, and the company will likely need to access capital markets within the next year.
Misapplied Metric: EV/EBITDA
EV/EBITDA is commonly used for diagnostics firms, but for PSNL, EBITDA is deeply negative and uninformative; instead, investors should focus on cash burn and revenue growth per reported financials.
Given that the company is pre-profit and has negative EBITDA, EV/EBITDA is not a meaningful valuation metric for Personalis. The market often applies this multiple to profitable peers like Natera, but for PSNL, it obscures the core value drivers: clinical volume growth and the path to reimbursement. A more appropriate metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which at 22.1x reflects the market's high expectations for future revenue growth, but this must be weighed against the cash burn rate. Investors should also consider the enterprise value-to-revenue multiple, which adjusts for the company's cash position, to better assess valuation relative to peers.