Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -1.9x · EV/EBITDA 5.9x · ROE -36.8%. (1997–2026 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $152M | $125M | $203M | $167M | $123M | $264M | $75M | $17M | $9M | $5M | $3M |
| Enterprise Value | $176M | $149M | $245M | $239M | $227M | $374M | $142M | $47M | $18M | $-3469568 | $2M |
| P/E Ratio → | -1.93 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.54 | 6.00 | 2.72 | 3.88 |
| P/S Ratio | 0.63 | 0.64 | 0.63 | 0.49 | 0.37 | 0.92 | 0.33 | 0.18 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.15 |
| P/B Ratio | 0.87 | 0.72 | 0.80 | 0.64 | 0.46 | 0.90 | 0.20 | 0.32 | 0.29 | 0.19 | 0.21 |
| P/FCF | 4.98 | 5.88 | 6.15 | 5.00 | 8.05 | 16.57 | 4.68 | 1.54 | 1.35 | 1.32 | 1.43 |
| P/OCF | 6.61 | 5.44 | 4.85 | 3.76 | 4.63 | 12.56 | 3.55 | 1.46 | 1.06 | 0.95 | 0.77 |
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 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 0.77 | 0.76 | 0.71 | 0.68 | 1.30 | 0.63 | 0.49 | 0.21 | -0.08 | 0.08 |
| EV / EBITDA | 5.92 | 5.18 | 5.66 | 5.48 | 5.49 | 11.61 | 4.19 | 2.37 | 1.65 | -0.57 | 0.56 |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 8.38 | 5.43 | -1.09 | 1.76 |
| EV / FCF | — | 6.99 | 7.44 | 7.18 | 14.88 | 23.46 | 8.89 | 4.14 | 2.57 | -0.90 | 0.82 |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 50.8% | 50.8% | 68.3% | 69.9% | 68.4% | 69.9% | 69.9% | 64.6% | 60.9% | 53.9% | 65.2% |
| Operating Margin | -6.7% | -6.7% | -0.5% | -0.4% | -1.2% | -2.5% | -2.5% | 7.8% | 6.7% | 7.7% | 5.3% |
| Net Profit Margin | -40.5% | -40.5% | -2.1% | -3.5% | -11.5% | -49.4% | -49.4% | 3.0% | 1.4% | 4.3% | 3.0% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -36.8% | -36.8% | -2.7% | -4.5% | -13.7% | -42.6% | -51.4% | 6.6% | 4.0% | 8.9% | 4.2% |
| ROA | -27.1% | -27.1% | -1.8% | -2.8% | -8.2% | -27.5% | -33.1% | 2.8% | 2.1% | 6.2% | 3.2% |
| ROIC | -4.0% | -4.0% | -0.4% | -0.3% | -0.8% | -1.3% | -1.6% | 9.0% | 14.3% | 15.7% | 6.1% |
| ROCE | -5.3% | -5.3% | -0.5% | -0.4% | -1.0% | -1.6% | -1.9% | 10.5% | 14.1% | 15.0% | 7.6% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.22 | 0.34 | 0.43 | 0.42 | 0.24 | 0.90 | 0.54 | 0.13 | 0.26 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 1.19 | 1.19 | 1.30 | 2.04 | 2.79 | 3.80 | 2.64 | 2.50 | 1.62 | 0.56 | 1.25 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.14 | 0.17 | 0.28 | 0.39 | 0.37 | 0.18 | 0.53 | 0.26 | -0.32 | -0.09 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 0.82 | 0.82 | 0.98 | 1.67 | 2.52 | 3.41 | 1.98 | 1.48 | 0.78 | -1.39 | -0.42 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 1.11 | 1.29 | 2.19 | 6.83 | 6.89 | 4.21 | 2.59 | 1.22 | -2.22 | -0.61 |
| Interest Coverage | -5.63 | -5.63 | -0.49 | -0.43 | -3.72 | -25.94 | -20.15 | 3.01 | 3.08 | 17.00 | 12.94 |
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.86 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.78 | 0.97 | 1.09 | 1.17 | 2.54 | 1.92 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.67 | 0.67 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.69 | 0.56 | 0.75 | 0.84 | 0.82 | 2.00 | 1.35 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.18 | 0.16 | 0.40 | 0.55 | 0.37 | 1.27 | 0.85 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.83 | 0.93 | 0.84 | 0.76 | 0.58 | 0.42 | 0.75 | 1.14 | 1.11 | 0.99 |
| Inventory Turnover | 20.11 | 20.11 | 12.41 | 6.90 | 5.88 | 4.98 | 5.71 | 3.67 | 3.85 | 3.93 | 2.06 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 27.00 | 19.26 | 23.22 | 29.60 | 31.80 | 26.25 | 33.07 | 40.09 | 45.98 | 53.00 |
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 2026 | 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 2026 | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 22.0% | 16.7% | 36.8% | 25.8% |
| FCF Yield | 20.1% | 17.0% | 16.3% | 20.0% | 12.4% | 6.0% | 21.4% | 64.7% | 74.1% | 75.8% | 70.0% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.7% | 0.8% | 1.4% | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.7% | 0.8% | 1.4% | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $33M | $33M | $33M | $33M | $31M | $29M | $10M | $8M | $6M | $5M |
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 SANG stock.
Sangoma Technologies Corporation's current P/E ratio is -1.9x. The historical average is 4.1x.
Sangoma Technologies Corporation's current EV/EBITDA is 5.9x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 3.9x.
Sangoma Technologies Corporation's return on equity (ROE) is -36.8%. The historical average is -2.3%.
Based on historical data, Sangoma Technologies Corporation is trading at a P/E of -1.9x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Sangoma Technologies Corporation has 50.8% gross margin and -6.7% operating margin.
Sangoma Technologies Corporation's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 1.2x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Shrinking revenue base with losses
Low Multiples Reflect Shrinking Earnings Base
Based on reported figures, SANG trades at 0.47 times sales and 3.27 times trailing EBITDA, a discount that reflects contracting revenue and a negative trailing P/E of -21.90 rather than a clearly mispriced asset.
The 0.47 price-to-sales and 4.63 price-to-free-cash-flow multiples look inexpensive against peers such as MGIC at 10.07 EV/EBITDA, yet the discount appears justified given revenue falling from $83.3M to $48.6M over ten quarters. Forward EV/EBITDA of 5.53 sitting above trailing 3.27 implies the market expects EBITDA to decline further, which investors should monitor closely. Cheap optics here should not be read as a value signal without evidence that the top line has stabilized.
Gross Margin Volatility Masks Operating Losses
As reported in financial statements, SANG's gross margin ranged from 67.5% to 74.3% before collapsing to 45.3% in 2026Q4, while operating margin stayed negative in most recent quarters at -12.5% in the latest period.
Gross margin strength of 71-74% through 2026Q1-Q3 did not carry through to operating profit, indicating that operating expenses consume the gross profit pool. The sharp 2026Q4 gross margin compression suggests either pricing pressure or a one-time cost event, though the data alone cannot distinguish between the two. Net margin of -145.6% in the latest quarter sits far below operating margin, which warrants further investigation into non-operating items rather than assumptions about core earning power.
Leverage Falls but Coverage Turns Negative
Based on SANG's reported figures, debt-to-equity fell from 0.38 to 0.20 and debt-to-EBITDA sits at 8.04 in 2026Q4, while interest coverage turned negative at -12.93, a combination that suggests debt service relies on sources other than operating earnings.
The apparent deleveraging is partly a mechanical result of equity shrinking through write-downs, so the lower D/E ratio may overstate balance sheet strength. Negative interest coverage in recent quarters indicates operating income does not currently cover interest expense, a pattern that may increase refinancing sensitivity. Investors should monitor debt maturity schedules, which the supplied data does not disclose.
Sub-1.0 Current Ratio Limits Short-Term Cushion
As reported in financial statements, SANG's current ratio stood at 0.78 and quick ratio at 0.67 in 2026Q4, both below 1.0, which may indicate limited headroom to absorb further operating losses without external funding or asset sales.
A current ratio below 1.0 combined with cash falling to $10.4M from $18.4M suggests a thin liquidity buffer relative to near-term obligations. The quick ratio sitting close to the current ratio implies receivables and cash, rather than inventory, underpin most of the liquid assets. Under a severe stress scenario with continued revenue decline, this position would likely require close monitoring of working capital.
Net Margin Ratio Obscures Core Earnings Trends
Net margin is the ratio most commonly misapplied to SANG, since reported net losses of -145.6% in 2026Q4 are far larger than operating losses of -12.5%, suggesting non-operating charges distort the picture of core profitability.
Using net margin as a proxy for earning power conflates impairment and other non-recurring charges with operating performance, which the goodwill reduction from $187.5M to $118.3M hints at. Operating margin and adjusted EBITDA trend would better reflect ongoing economics, though the supplied data does not include an adjusted series. Analysts should separate impairment effects before drawing conclusions about the underlying business trajectory.