Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -15.7x · EV/EBITDA N/A · ROE -270.0%. (2003–2025 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 | $13.0B | $13.1B | $12.8B | $1.6B | $822M | $248M | $327M | $53M | $115M | $898M | $644M |
| Enterprise Value | $12.9B | $12.9B | $12.7B | $1.6B | $960M | $197M | $278M | $3M | $79M | $870M | $609M |
| P/E Ratio → | -15.65 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 12.09 | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | — | — | — | — | 1408.94 | 185.49 | 519.60 | 85.85 | 2.01 | 63.41 | 271.22 |
| P/B Ratio | 24.97 | 26.74 | 41.29 | 26.30 | 7.96 | 4.02 | 5.60 | 0.86 | 2.05 | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 42.77 |
| P/OCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 42.46 |
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 | — | — | — | — | 1646.78 | 147.24 | 442.57 | 5.33 | 1.39 | 61.40 | 256.46 |
| EV / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 10.81 | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 8.18 | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 40.45 |
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 | — | — | — | — | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 98.8% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | — | — | -10225.4% | -4764.3% | -11392.7% | -3697.6% | 9.4% | -182.3% | -1046.0% |
| Net Profit Margin | — | — | — | — | -11174.8% | -4897.8% | -6127.6% | -3920.2% | 19.0% | -142.3% | -899.5% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -270.0% | -270.0% | -95.0% | -585.6% | -79.0% | -109.1% | -64.5% | -41.0% | 42.4% | — | -230.6% |
| ROA | -238.4% | -238.4% | -69.5% | -137.4% | -20.8% | -82.2% | -51.1% | -31.0% | 13.8% | -32.2% | -51.7% |
| ROIC | -288.0% | -288.0% | -84.2% | -216.8% | -35.4% | -466.4% | -493.7% | -104.7% | 19.7% | — | — |
| ROCE | -267.6% | -267.6% | -78.6% | -146.2% | -20.7% | -101.4% | -113.5% | -35.4% | 10.0% | -65.5% | -77.1% |
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 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.01 | — | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.31 | -0.25 | 0.45 | 1.34 | -0.83 | -0.83 | -0.81 | -0.63 | — | — |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | -4.80 | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | -2.33 |
| Interest Coverage | — | — | -19.40 | -4.23 | -11.96 | -313.54 | -150.08 | -695.67 | 15.65 | — | -23.08 |
Net cash position: cash ($167M) exceeds total debt ($16M)
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 | 9.87 | 9.87 | 10.15 | 9.30 | 16.93 | 3.80 | 4.41 | 6.27 | 3.56 | 1.56 | 3.06 |
| Quick Ratio | 9.87 | 9.87 | 10.15 | 9.30 | 16.93 | 3.80 | 4.41 | 6.27 | 3.56 | 1.56 | 3.06 |
| Cash Ratio | 9.77 | 9.77 | 9.88 | 9.13 | 8.99 | 2.80 | 3.34 | 5.05 | 2.05 | 0.87 | 2.58 |
| Asset Turnover | — | — | — | — | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.72 | 0.18 | 0.05 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | — | — | — | 3119.90 | 3470.61 | 4342.81 | 189.77 | 79.96 | — | — |
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 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 8.3% | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2.3% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 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% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $748M | $719M | $620M | $193M | $92M | $70M | $33M | $86M | $65M | $62M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 23 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 SMMT stock.
Summit Therapeutics Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -15.7x. The historical average is 12.1x.
Summit Therapeutics Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -270.0%. The historical average is -77.6%.
Based on historical data, Summit Therapeutics Inc. is trading at a P/E of -15.7x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Single-asset regulatory dependence
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Premium Priced on Binary Hope
SMMT trades at a P/B of 20.12 and forward EV/EBITDA of 12,518.7, implying the market capitalizes a blockbuster ivonescimab outcome despite no revenue, per reported multiples.
The valuation embeds a high probability of clinical and regulatory success, as evidenced by a P/B of 20.12 versus peers like KYMR at 6.49 and NUVL at 7.22. The forward EV/EBITDA of 12,518.7 is essentially meaningless for a pre-revenue firm, but it underscores that the market is pricing in future profitability far beyond current fundamentals. Investors should recognize that any negative clinical readout could trigger a severe de-rating, as the current multiple offers no margin of safety.
Negative Margins Reflect Pre-Revenue Burn
Gross, operating, and net margins are all unavailable or negative, with ROE at -41.3% in 2026Q2, reflecting escalating R&D and SG&A costs with no offsetting revenue, per financial statements.
The absence of revenue means traditional margin analysis is moot; instead, the focus is on the magnitude of operating losses, which widened to -$220.5M in 2026Q2. Stock-based compensation of $351.3M in 2025Q2 inflated reported losses, but the cash-based burn is still substantial. The negative ROE of -41.3% in 2026Q2, though improved from -180.3% in 2025Q2, indicates that the company is consuming equity at a rapid pace, and profitability will remain elusive until ivonescimab generates sales.
ROIC Deeply Negative, No Capital Efficiency
ROIC swung from -13.0% in 2024Q3 to -57.1% in 2026Q2, reflecting heavy investment in clinical trials with no return, as per reported figures.
The negative ROIC is expected for a clinical-stage biotech, but the magnitude and volatility are notable. The improvement from -109.9% in 2025Q4 to -57.1% in 2026Q2 may indicate a temporary stabilization in spending relative to invested capital, but the trend is still deeply negative. The company is not compounding capital; it is consuming it in pursuit of a single asset, and the return on capital will only turn positive if ivonescimab achieves commercial success.
Asset-Light Model, Minimal Working Capital
Asset turnover and working capital metrics are unavailable, but the balance sheet shows cash dominating assets and negligible PPE, indicating an asset-light model with no inventory or receivables, per SEC filings.
The lack of DSO, DIO, and DPO data is consistent with a pre-revenue company that has no operational cycle. The current ratio of 6.96 in 2026Q2 is high, but it is driven by cash reserves that are being consumed rapidly. The efficiency of capital deployment is poor, as the company is spending heavily on R&D with no tangible output yet. Investors should monitor the cash burn rate relative to the clinical milestones achieved, as this will determine the need for future dilutive financing.
Low Debt Masks Future Capital Needs
D/E fell from 2.48 in 2024Q1 to 0.03 in 2026Q2, but the company's quarterly burn of ~$220M implies imminent financing needs, as per reported figures.
The balance sheet appears conservative with minimal debt, but this is misleading for a pre-revenue biotech. The $20.4M in debt is negligible, but the company will need substantial capital to fund ongoing trials and potential commercialization. The interest coverage ratio was negative in 2024, and while it is now unavailable, the lack of earnings means debt service would be impossible without cash reserves. The low leverage is a temporary condition that will likely change as the company seeks additional funding.
Cash Buffer Shrinks Against Accelerating Burn
Current ratio improved to 6.96 in 2026Q2, but cash of $419.4M covers only about two quarters of operating losses, which averaged $220M per quarter, based on reported figures.
The liquidity position appears strong on a static basis, but the dynamic burn rate erodes this buffer quickly. The current ratio of 6.96 is high, but it is inflated by cash that is being spent on R&D. With operating losses averaging $220M per quarter, the company has less than two years of runway, and likely less than one year if spending accelerates. This suggests that the company will need to raise capital soon, which could dilute existing shareholders.
Premium Valuation vs. Pre-Revenue Peers
SMMT's P/B of 20.12 is significantly higher than peers like KYMR (6.49) and NUVL (7.22), reflecting the market's optimism for ivonescimab, per peer comparison data.
The valuation gap suggests that the market assigns a higher probability of success to SMMT's lead asset than to peers' pipelines. However, this premium is risky, as SMMT has a single asset and faces regulatory hurdles, while peers may have more diversified pipelines. The negative ROE of -41.3% is in line with peers, but the higher P/B implies that investors are paying for a blockbuster outcome that is not yet proven. This gap may narrow if clinical data disappoints.
Misapplied P/E on Pre-Revenue Model
The P/E ratio is meaningless for SMMT because it has no earnings; a more appropriate metric is EV/invested capital or probability-adjusted NPV, as per financial analysis.
The P/E of -9.14 is a common misapplication for pre-revenue biotechs, as it provides no insight into valuation. Instead, investors should use metrics like EV/IC or a risk-adjusted NPV of ivonescimab's future cash flows. The forward EV/EBITDA of 12,518.7 is also misleading, as it assumes future EBITDA that is far from certain. The correct approach is to model the probability of clinical success and regulatory approval, and then discount the potential revenue stream accordingly.