Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 4.1x · EV/EBITDA 6.3x · ROE 8.9%. (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 | $1.4B | $667M | $512M | $656M | $477M | $142M | $404M | $1.1B | $232M | $331M | $1.3B |
| Enterprise Value | $3.0B | $2.3B | $1.9B | $1.9B | $1.8B | $1.5B | $1.8B | $2.5B | $1.6B | $1.9B | $2.8B |
| P/E Ratio → | 4.14 | 5.04 | 3.45 | 2.46 | 2.82 | — | — | 72.67 | — | 43.44 | 22.99 |
| P/S Ratio | 1.41 | 0.83 | 0.64 | 0.74 | 0.55 | 0.26 | 0.63 | 1.84 | 0.44 | 0.63 | 2.65 |
| P/B Ratio | 0.72 | 0.36 | 0.29 | 0.40 | 0.31 | 0.11 | 0.29 | 0.75 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.90 |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | 6.77 | — | — | 23.54 | — | 4.43 | — | — |
| P/OCF | 4.57 | 2.25 | 1.66 | 1.66 | 1.65 | 2.68 | 1.97 | 2.47 | 3.33 | 1.98 | 7.80 |
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 | — | 2.87 | 2.40 | 2.11 | 2.13 | 2.70 | 2.79 | 4.11 | 3.03 | 3.55 | 5.88 |
| EV / EBITDA | 6.32 | 5.58 | 4.61 | 3.65 | 4.86 | 212.13 | 7.70 | 9.72 | 8.69 | 8.73 | 13.95 |
| EV / EBIT | 12.37 | 9.52 | 6.54 | 4.57 | 7.35 | — | 22.25 | 27.90 | — | 24.94 | 29.58 |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — | 19.41 | — | — | 104.80 | — | 30.70 | — | — |
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 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 35.4% | 35.4% | 34.2% | 41.6% | 33.3% | 0.3% | 25.0% | 23.6% | 12.3% | 19.4% | 24.0% |
| Operating Margin | 30.1% | 30.1% | 34.6% | 44.0% | 29.8% | -21.9% | 15.0% | 19.0% | 7.2% | 14.4% | 18.6% |
| Net Profit Margin | 20.1% | 20.1% | 21.9% | 33.7% | 23.7% | -27.7% | 3.7% | 2.5% | -18.7% | 1.4% | 11.6% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 8.9% | 8.9% | 10.3% | 18.9% | 14.5% | -11.3% | 1.7% | 1.0% | -6.6% | 0.5% | 3.9% |
| ROA | 4.2% | 4.2% | 5.0% | 9.0% | 6.6% | -5.0% | 0.8% | 0.5% | -3.0% | 0.2% | 1.8% |
| ROIC | 5.4% | 5.4% | 6.9% | 10.2% | 7.0% | -3.3% | 2.6% | 3.0% | 1.0% | 1.9% | 2.5% |
| ROCE | 7.1% | 7.1% | 8.8% | 13.1% | 9.3% | -4.5% | 3.5% | 3.9% | 1.3% | 2.6% | 3.3% |
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 | 1.04 | 1.04 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 1.10 | 1.13 | 1.13 | 1.06 | 1.06 | 1.16 | 1.24 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 4.70 | 4.70 | 4.22 | 3.11 | 4.41 | 209.96 | 6.70 | 6.16 | 8.63 | 8.14 | 8.63 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.87 | 0.80 | 0.74 | 0.89 | 1.03 | 1.01 | 0.92 | 0.91 | 1.03 | 1.10 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 3.96 | 3.96 | 3.38 | 2.38 | 3.59 | 191.69 | 5.97 | 5.37 | 7.43 | 7.20 | 7.66 |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | 12.64 | — | — | 81.26 | — | 26.28 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 2.47 | 2.47 | 2.60 | 3.87 | 4.17 | -0.66 | 1.51 | 1.19 | -0.32 | 1.14 | 2.44 |
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 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 1.10 | 1.57 | 1.38 | 0.72 | 0.84 | 1.12 | 1.25 | 0.90 | 0.91 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.92 | 0.92 | 1.06 | 1.50 | 1.31 | 0.65 | 0.78 | 1.08 | 1.17 | 0.85 | 0.86 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.85 | 1.17 | 0.84 | 0.38 | 0.45 | 0.56 | 0.87 | 0.61 | 0.51 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.20 | 0.22 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.17 | 0.16 | 0.15 |
| Inventory Turnover | 40.97 | 40.97 | 27.91 | 23.08 | 21.88 | 23.77 | 22.15 | 35.03 | 22.79 | 26.18 | 19.53 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 24.61 | 15.28 | 21.33 | 36.94 | 38.74 | 26.10 | 36.93 | 38.76 | 28.68 | 34.08 |
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 | 4.5% | 9.0% | 14.0% | 9.4% | 9.2% | 25.5% | 11.6% | 4.5% | 19.2% | 12.0% | 3.2% |
| Payout Ratio | 37.4% | 37.4% | 40.8% | 20.6% | 21.4% | — | 194.6% | 326.0% | — | 523.8% | 72.3% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 24.1% | 19.8% | 29.0% | 40.7% | 35.5% | — | — | 1.4% | — | 2.3% | 4.3% |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | 14.8% | — | — | 4.2% | — | 22.6% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 16.5% | 0.5% | 0.1% | 14.8% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.6% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 4.5% | 9.0% | 14.0% | 26.0% | 9.7% | 25.6% | 26.3% | 4.5% | 19.2% | 12.0% | 4.8% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $30M | $30M | $30M | $28M | $20M | $50M | $50M | $17M | $17M | $55M |
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 TEN stock.
Tsakos Energy Navigation Limited's current P/E ratio is 4.1x. The historical average is 32.6x. This places it at the 19th percentile of its historical range.
Tsakos Energy Navigation Limited's current EV/EBITDA is 6.3x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 9.1x.
Tsakos Energy Navigation Limited's return on equity (ROE) is 8.9%. The historical average is 3.4%.
Based on historical data, Tsakos Energy Navigation Limited is trading at a P/E of 4.1x. This is at the 19th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Tsakos Energy Navigation Limited's current dividend yield is 4.51% with a payout ratio of 37.4%.
Tsakos Energy Navigation Limited has 35.4% gross margin and 30.1% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Tsakos Energy Navigation Limited's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 4.7x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Cyclical margin sustainability risk
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
Cyclical Discount vs. Asset Value
Based on reported figures, TEN trades at a forward P/E of 6.93 and a P/B of 0.84, suggesting a significant discount to its net asset value compared to peers like STNG (P/B 1.34) and DHT (P/B 3.24), indicating the market may be discounting future rate volatility.
The valuation discount appears driven by TEN's more complex corporate structure and related-party management fees, which can obscure true operational efficiency relative to pure-play peers. The low price-to-book ratio, especially when contrasted with the recent surge in profitability, suggests the market is not pricing the current earnings power as sustainable, likely anticipating cyclical normalization in charter rates.
Margin Surge Approaches Cyclical Ceiling
As reported in recent financial statements, TEN's gross margin expanded sharply to 46.8% in 2026Q2, a level substantially above the peer group median and its own ten-quarter average, driven by favorable charter rates for its specialized fleet.
This margin expansion appears heavily reliant on the spot market exposure within its conventional tanker fleet and the high utilization of its LNG and shuttle segments. The sustainability of this peak margin is questionable without a concurrent decline in volatile voyage expenses like bunker fuel, implying the current profitability level may represent a cyclical high rather than a new structural baseline.
ROIC Recovery Masks Underlying Capital Intensity
According to recent SEC filings, TEN's ROIC improved to 2.6% in 2026Q2 from a low of 1.0% in 2024Q4, yet remains below peer levels like TNK's 12.5%, suggesting the company's capital-intensive fleet model is generating inferior returns on invested capital relative to more focused operators.
The recent uptick in ROIC is driven almost entirely by the cyclical expansion in net margins rather than a meaningful improvement in asset turnover, which has stagnated near 0.07. This indicates that returns are highly sensitive to rate cycles and that the company's substantial fixed asset base is not being utilized with peer-level efficiency.
Anomalous Leverage Ratio Obscures True Obligations
Based on the reported financial data, TEN's debt-to-equity ratio of 1.02 in 2026Q2 is strikingly low for the shipping sector, where peers like NAT (0.95) operate with higher leverage, warranting scrutiny over potential off-balance sheet lease liabilities that may distort the true financial risk profile.
The interest coverage ratio of 5.51 appears comfortable, but this strength is contingent on sustaining current high EBITDA levels. If charter rates normalize, the fixed-cost structure could quickly erode coverage, and the potentially understated leverage suggests refinancing risk may be more significant than headline ratios indicate.
Asset Turnover Stagnation Amid Revenue Growth
As reported in the financial statements, TEN's asset turnover has consistently hovered between 0.05 and 0.07 over ten quarters, indicating that recent revenue growth has been funded by asset expansion rather than improved utilization of the existing fleet.
This stagnant asset turnover underscores the capital-intensive, asset-heavy nature of the business model. The negative cash conversion cycles in some quarters (e.g., -10 in 2024Q4) appear to reflect favorable payment terms with suppliers, but the overall efficiency profile suggests limited operational leverage, making the company highly dependent on high charter rates to generate attractive returns.
P/E Multiple Fails to Capture Fleet Value
The P/E ratio is the most commonly misapplied metric to TEN's business model because it fails to account for the substantial asset value of the fleet, which is better reflected in the P/B ratio of 0.84 that trades below book value.
For capital-intensive shipping companies, earnings can be highly volatile and depressed by non-cash depreciation charges, making the P/E ratio less informative. Investors should instead focus on the Price-to-NAV ratio and EV/EBITDA, which better capture the long-term earning power of the physical assets and the company's ability to generate cash flows through various chartering cycles.