Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 19.9x · EV/EBITDA 5.2x · ROE 16.2%. (1996–2025 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 | $10.2B | $8.0B | $6.9B | $5.3B | $4.3B | $4.4B | $3.2B | $2.8B | $2.5B | $4.5B | $4.0B |
| Enterprise Value | $18.7B | $16.5B | $15.7B | $13.3B | $11.1B | $11.1B | $10.0B | $10.9B | $9.3B | $9.8B | $9.3B |
| P/E Ratio → | 19.88 | 15.96 | 14.18 | 13.24 | 4.93 | 8.54 | — | — | 9.28 | 6.22 | 15.16 |
| P/S Ratio | 0.78 | 0.63 | 0.55 | 0.45 | 0.34 | 0.44 | 0.38 | 0.32 | 0.30 | 0.61 | 0.59 |
| P/B Ratio | 3.65 | 2.62 | 2.23 | 1.74 | 1.45 | 1.58 | 1.43 | 1.15 | 1.00 | 1.57 | 1.94 |
| P/FCF | 10.71 | 17.43 | — | — | — | 18.85 | 3.12 | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 3.94 | 3.08 | 3.06 | 2.27 | 1.84 | 2.03 | 1.48 | 1.33 | 1.55 | 2.88 | 2.48 |
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 | — | 1.30 | 1.23 | 1.11 | 0.89 | 1.12 | 1.18 | 1.23 | 1.11 | 1.35 | 1.38 |
| EV / EBITDA | 5.17 | 4.92 | 4.76 | 4.21 | 3.40 | 4.14 | 4.38 | 4.83 | 4.55 | 5.63 | 5.23 |
| EV / EBIT | 16.87 | 15.14 | 14.97 | 14.54 | 7.67 | 12.25 | 76.02 | 54.83 | 16.37 | 22.34 | 16.76 |
| EV / FCF | — | 35.91 | — | — | — | 47.49 | 9.62 | — | — | — | — |
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 | 20.3% | 20.3% | 20.0% | 20.8% | 22.8% | 20.8% | 15.1% | 14.8% | 18.7% | 19.6% | 22.2% |
| Operating Margin | 8.7% | 8.7% | 8.4% | 9.0% | 11.4% | 8.8% | — | 3.2% | 7.1% | 6.0% | 8.7% |
| Net Profit Margin | 3.9% | 3.9% | 3.8% | 3.4% | 7.0% | 5.2% | -1.4% | -0.3% | 3.4% | 9.9% | 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 | 16.2% | 16.2% | 15.8% | 13.5% | 30.2% | 20.5% | -5.2% | -1.0% | 10.6% | 29.4% | 13.0% |
| ROA | 3.0% | 3.0% | 3.0% | 2.7% | 6.1% | 3.9% | -0.9% | -0.2% | 2.3% | 6.4% | 2.4% |
| ROIC | 7.1% | 7.1% | 7.0% | 7.8% | 11.1% | 7.1% | — | 2.1% | 5.1% | 4.2% | 5.9% |
| ROCE | 8.2% | 8.2% | 8.4% | 9.3% | 13.1% | 8.1% | — | 2.5% | 5.9% | 4.7% | 6.3% |
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 | 2.84 | 2.84 | 2.85 | 2.65 | 2.41 | 2.48 | 3.05 | 3.29 | 2.70 | 1.90 | 2.63 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 2.59 | 2.59 | 2.70 | 2.58 | 2.18 | 2.59 | 3.02 | 3.60 | 3.35 | 3.11 | 3.03 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 2.78 | 2.80 | 2.59 | 2.32 | 2.40 | 2.98 | 3.26 | 2.68 | 1.88 | 2.60 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 2.53 | 2.53 | 2.65 | 2.51 | 2.09 | 2.50 | 2.96 | 3.57 | 3.31 | 3.07 | 3.00 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 18.48 | — | — | — | 28.64 | 6.50 | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 2.70 | 2.70 | 2.71 | 3.09 | 6.33 | 4.24 | 0.50 | 0.82 | 3.16 | 3.12 | 3.75 |
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 | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.75 | 0.62 | 0.66 | 0.77 | 0.78 | 0.59 | 0.62 | 0.66 | 0.63 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.75 | 0.62 | 0.64 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.56 | 0.59 | 0.62 | 0.59 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.03 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.77 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.87 | 0.72 | 0.65 | 0.61 | 0.63 | 0.63 | 0.62 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | 123.35 | 114.46 | 116.77 | 93.48 | 86.14 | 79.38 | 75.60 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 54.58 | 53.45 | 52.23 | 47.16 | 53.89 | 51.25 | 50.57 | 54.02 | 50.80 | 44.93 |
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 | 1.3% | 1.8% | 1.9% | 2.4% | 2.9% | 2.8% | 3.7% | 4.1% | 4.4% | 2.1% | 2.3% |
| Payout Ratio | 29.1% | 29.1% | 27.6% | 31.5% | 14.2% | 23.5% | — | — | 39.3% | 13.3% | 34.6% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 5.0% | 6.3% | 7.1% | 7.6% | 20.3% | 11.7% | — | — | 10.8% | 16.1% | 6.6% |
| FCF Yield | 9.3% | 5.7% | — | — | — | 5.3% | 32.0% | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 5.1% | 6.5% | 4.6% | 6.3% | 13.1% | 1.3% | 0.9% | 1.0% | 1.2% | 1.8% | 0.9% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 6.4% | 8.3% | 6.6% | 8.7% | 16.0% | 4.1% | 4.6% | 5.1% | 5.6% | 3.9% | 3.2% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $42M | $44M | $46M | $51M | $54M | $52M | $52M | $53M | $53M | $53M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 30 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 R stock.
Ryder System, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 19.9x. The historical average is 16.0x. This places it at the 85th percentile of its historical range.
Ryder System, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 5.2x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 4.5x.
Ryder System, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 16.2%. The historical average is 12.8%.
Based on historical data, Ryder System, Inc. is trading at a P/E of 19.9x. This is at the 85th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Ryder System, Inc.'s current dividend yield is 1.30% with a payout ratio of 29.1%.
Ryder System, Inc. has 20.3% gross margin and 8.7% operating margin.
Ryder System, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 2.6x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Leverage and residual-value sensitivity
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Cheap on Assets, Rich on Earnings
At an EV/EBITDA of 5.64, Ryder trades at less than half the multiple commanded by GATX at 13.88 and Air Lease at 9.66, yet its 22.59 trailing P/E sits above GATX's 18.14, per current market multiples — a divergence that reflects the capital structure rather than earnings quality.
The split is structurally consistent with a debt-funded fleet: EBITDA is inflated by depreciation addbacks running $422M–$650M per quarter, which makes the enterprise multiple look inexpensive, while a 4.7% net margin in 2026Q3 and heavy interest expense make the equity multiple look demanding. The 3.71 P/B against GATX's 1.63 and Air Lease's 0.86 suggests the market is paying above depreciated fleet book for Ryder's service and residual-realization capabilities, rather than pricing it as a pure asset owner. Investors should treat P/FCF of 22.63 as the more decision-relevant anchor, since free cash flow has swung from negative to positive four quarters running and remains sensitive to fleet capex timing.
Returns Remain Below Cost of Capital
Ryder's ROIC of 2.2% in 2026Q3, its strongest reading in ten quarters, still trails GATX's 3.7% and United Rentals' 12.4%, per the peer comparison table, suggesting the fleet-heavy asset base may be generating returns below the cost of the capital it employs.
The step-up from 0.9% in 2026Q2 to 2.2% tracks the operating margin recovery from 4.0% to 9.0% rather than any efficiency gain, since asset turnover barely moved from 0.21 to 0.21 — implying the improvement is cyclical margin rather than structural compounding. ROE of 5.5% versus ROA of 1.0% confirms that the modest equity return is predominantly leverage-amplified, a driver that reverses if freight conditions soften again. On this trajectory, the company appears to be stabilizing returns rather than compounding them, and durability will hinge on whether the SCS and maintenance-only mix can lift margins without proportionally expanding the asset base.
Deleveraging Visible, Coverage Still Thin
Debt-to-equity has compressed from 3.05 in 2026Q1 to 2.42 in 2026Q3 while interest coverage rebounded from 1.37 to 3.35, according to Ryder's quarterly ratio disclosures, a recovery that appears to reflect the Q2 trough rather than a proven shift in debt service capacity.
The 2026Q2 readings of D/EBITDA at 63.56 and coverage of 1.37 are arithmetic artifacts of a collapsed EBITDA quarter, but they do illustrate how violently leverage ratios can deteriorate when used-vehicle gains and rental utilization fall together. At 2.42x debt-to-equity and roughly 9.7x D/EBITDA, the current structure still leaves limited headroom if the freight cycle weakens, and the interest burden is meaningful against a net margin that averaged roughly 4% across the period. Because a substantial share of debt funds depreciating fleet assets, investors should monitor whether continued debt retirement is funded by fleet runoff or by genuinely higher operating cash generation.
Thin Current Ratio With No Inventory Buffer
The current ratio has printed below 1.0 in eight of the last ten quarters, reaching 0.64 in 2026Q2 and 0.67 in 2026Q3, while the quick ratio matches it exactly, based on Ryder's reported ratios — meaning no inventory layer exists to convert under stress.
The equality of current and quick ratios is consistent with fleet vehicles being carried as long-lived property rather than inventory, so the liquidity profile offers no secondary cushion beyond cash and receivables, which turn over at a 55-day DSO. Under severe stress, the company's defense would appear to rest on recurring lease collections and operating cash flow rather than on balance-sheet liquidity, an arrangement that works while contract revenue stays stable but narrows options if receivables slow. The pattern of sub-unit current ratios over ten quarters looks structural to the leasing model rather than acute, though it does warrant monitoring alongside the deferred revenue line that fell to zero in 2026Q3.
Receivable Float Exceeds Supplier Float
Asset turnover improved modestly from 0.19 through 2025 to 0.21 in 2026Q3, while DSO of 55 days remains more than double DPO of 26 days, per Ryder's quarterly ratio data, indicating the company extends roughly twice the credit float it captures from suppliers.
DPO shortened from 31 days in 2024Q3 to 26 days in 2026Q3, which, if sustained, suggests less supplier-side financing than the company historically relied on and a modest ongoing cash use. DSO has held in a tight 52–58 day band, implying collection discipline is steady and that the revenue rebound into 2026Q3 was not financed through looser customer terms. Inventory days and the cash conversion cycle are unavailable in the reported data, so working-capital conclusions rest on the receivable and payable components alone and warrant confirmation before drawing firmer inferences.
The P/E Most Often Misapplied Here
Ryder's 22.59 trailing P/E appears rich beside GATX at 18.14, yet EV/EBITDA of 5.64 versus GATX's 13.88 tells the opposite story, and the earnings multiple is the one most commonly misapplied to this model where depreciation and interest dominate the income statement.
The P/E obscures two realities specific to Ryder: depreciation expense is an estimate driven by residual-value assumptions on the fleet, and the interest embedded in net income funds assets that also generate the EBITDA — so the multiple conflates accounting judgment with financing cost rather than measuring operating performance. It also treats quarters with outsized used-vehicle gains as if they were run-rate earnings, which matters given the 440bp gross margin swing between 2026Q2 and 2026Q3. A more appropriate pair would be EV/EBITDA adjusted for normalized gains on sale, read alongside ROIC and free cash flow per unit of fleet book value, to judge whether the asset base earns an adequate spread over its funding cost.