Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -5.6x · EV/EBITDA 10.8x · ROE -16.9%. (2019–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $102M | $189M | $11M | $20M | $68M | $123M | $19M | — |
| Enterprise Value | $248M | $335M | $209M | $250M | $251M | $-32124152 | $226M | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -5.60 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 0.35 | 0.63 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.18 | 0.47 | 0.16 | — |
| P/B Ratio | 1.75 | 3.09 | 0.22 | 0.34 | 0.40 | 0.41 | — | — |
| P/FCF | 4.60 | 5.84 | 1.21 | 2.35 | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 2.73 | 5.04 | 0.70 | 0.94 | — | — | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 1.11 | 0.63 | 0.63 | 0.69 | -0.12 | 1.90 | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 10.84 | 73.64 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | 25.00 | — | — | 4.28 | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 10.36 | 22.42 | 28.70 | — | — | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 65.3% | 65.3% | 54.5% | 39.0% | 68.0% | 68.6% | 56.4% | 63.9% |
| Operating Margin | -6.9% | -6.9% | -20.3% | -32.9% | -7.1% | -15.4% | -14.4% | 8.1% |
| Net Profit Margin | -3.2% | -3.2% | -8.7% | -25.2% | 12.1% | -145.6% | -24.5% | -1.0% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -16.9% | -16.9% | -52.3% | -88.4% | 18.8% | -278.2% | — | — |
| ROA | -1.6% | -1.6% | -3.6% | -10.4% | 4.0% | -52.5% | -13.0% | -0.7% |
| ROIC | -6.8% | -6.8% | -18.9% | -30.7% | -7.8% | -18.5% | -7.2% | 5.6% |
| ROCE | -4.5% | -4.5% | -9.5% | -15.0% | -2.5% | -6.0% | -9.0% | 7.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 6.20 | 6.20 | 10.97 | 12.67 | 4.50 | 2.47 | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | 83.30 | 83.30 | — | — | — | — | — | 6.94 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 2.39 | 3.82 | 3.86 | 1.10 | -0.51 | — | — |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 32.12 | 32.12 | — | — | — | — | — | 6.67 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 4.52 | 21.21 | 26.35 | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 0.69 | 0.69 | -1.84 | -6.46 | 4.39 | -31.32 | -0.81 | 0.83 |
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 1.66 | 1.66 | 7.00 | 6.07 | 10.92 | 13.09 | 1.91 | 1.43 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.40 | 1.40 | 5.99 | 5.28 | 9.39 | 12.63 | 1.16 | 0.92 |
| Cash Ratio | 1.25 | 1.25 | 5.43 | 4.55 | 7.92 | 11.80 | 0.31 | 0.19 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.60 | 0.49 | 0.43 | 0.36 | 0.21 | 0.53 | 0.74 |
| Inventory Turnover | 2.18 | 2.18 | 2.20 | 2.66 | 1.07 | 2.31 | 2.24 | 3.09 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 28.44 | 31.08 | 50.47 | 77.59 | 72.17 | 71.06 | 51.96 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 21.7% | 17.1% | 82.4% | 42.5% | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 17.3% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 0.0% | 0.8% | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 17.3% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 0.0% | 0.8% | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $7M | $7M | $7M | $7M | $5M | $2M | $2M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 7 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 SKIN stock.
SkinHealth Systems Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -5.6x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
SkinHealth Systems Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 10.8x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 73.6x.
SkinHealth Systems Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -16.9%. The historical average is -83.4%.
Based on historical data, SkinHealth Systems Inc. is trading at a P/E of -5.6x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
SkinHealth Systems Inc. has 65.3% gross margin and -6.9% operating margin.
SkinHealth Systems Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 83.3x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Hardware reliability and leverage
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Market Skepticism Reflects Operational Headwinds
Based on reported financial data, the company trades at a P/S ratio of 0.28, which suggests that the market is heavily discounting future growth prospects compared to historical averages and broader aesthetic industry peers, likely due to the persistent negative revenue trends and ongoing hardware reliability concerns.
The current valuation multiples appear to reflect a market that has largely abandoned the growth narrative in favor of a distressed turnaround thesis. Investors should monitor whether the low P/S ratio represents a value opportunity or a permanent impairment of the brand's ability to command premium pricing in the aesthetic device market.
Capital Efficiency Deteriorating Under Pressure
As reported in recent financial statements, the company's ROIC has remained consistently negative, bottoming out at -5.8% in 2024Q3, which indicates that the firm is currently failing to generate adequate returns on its invested capital while struggling to stabilize its core hardware and consumable business model.
The inability to achieve positive returns on capital suggests that the current cost structure is misaligned with the company's revenue generation capacity. This trend warrants further investigation into whether the recent hardware rollout costs are temporary or if the business model requires a fundamental restructuring to achieve long-term profitability.
Working Capital Management Remains Inefficient
According to the company's reported figures, the cash conversion cycle has remained elevated, peaking at 226 days in 2025Q1, which highlights significant inefficiencies in inventory management and a potential buildup of obsolete hardware components that are failing to convert into timely cash inflows for the business.
The extended DIO and CCC suggest that the company is carrying excessive inventory, likely tied to the Syndeo hardware transition. This inefficiency ties up critical liquidity and increases the risk of further write-downs, which could continue to pressure the company's already strained balance sheet and operating margins.
Debt Burden Constrains Strategic Flexibility
Based on the company's reported figures, the debt-to-equity ratio of 6.65 as of 2026Q1 indicates a highly leveraged capital structure that leaves little room for operational error, especially given the company's recent inability to maintain consistent positive interest coverage ratios in the face of declining revenue.
The elevated leverage profile appears to be a significant risk factor, as it limits the company's ability to fund necessary R&D or marketing initiatives without risking further dilution or covenant breaches. Investors should monitor the company's ability to service this debt if the current negative operating margin trend persists.
Misapplication of Recurring Revenue Metrics
Market participants often misapply the 'razor-and-blade' recurring revenue metric to this business, failing to account for the fact that hardware reliability issues can permanently sever the link between the installed base and consumable sales, rendering traditional annuity-based valuation models potentially misleading for this specific company.
Analysts should instead focus on the 'utilization rate' per machine and warranty claim frequency, as these metrics provide a more accurate picture of the health of the consumable stream. Relying solely on the installed base count obscures the reality that a non-functional machine provides zero recurring revenue value.