Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 52.6x · EV/EBITDA 66.7x · ROE 4.8%. (2005–2025 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 | $4.7B | $3.7B | $3.6B | $3.3B | $3.6B | $5.3B | $4.1B | $5.0B | $4.2B | $4.5B | $5.1B |
| Enterprise Value | $9.2B | $8.2B | $7.9B | $8.1B | $8.1B | $8.0B | $7.2B | $8.7B | $7.6B | $7.9B | $7.6B |
| P/E Ratio → | 52.56 | 41.19 | 45.93 | 45.46 | 50.00 | 65.72 | 48.97 | 64.36 | 48.42 | 50.41 | 63.61 |
| P/S Ratio | 14.67 | 11.47 | 11.84 | 10.80 | 12.44 | 18.51 | 13.81 | 17.48 | 13.76 | 15.08 | 17.11 |
| P/B Ratio | 2.48 | 1.95 | 1.93 | 1.71 | 1.96 | 3.07 | 2.44 | 2.95 | 2.37 | 2.67 | 3.04 |
| P/FCF | 66.47 | 51.96 | 41.97 | 38.46 | 100.00 | 64.90 | 34.41 | 50.37 | 49.70 | 46.43 | 66.69 |
| P/OCF | 57.23 | 44.74 | 40.52 | 36.30 | 93.06 | 63.85 | 33.51 | 48.53 | 45.19 | 44.53 | 59.52 |
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 | — | 25.38 | 26.22 | 26.65 | 27.74 | 27.72 | 24.20 | 30.29 | 25.28 | 26.59 | 25.70 |
| EV / EBITDA | 66.69 | 59.22 | 66.59 | 72.92 | 67.82 | 59.96 | 53.74 | 69.18 | 52.24 | 51.51 | 53.56 |
| EV / EBIT | 80.09 | 71.12 | 79.23 | 87.07 | 87.74 | 79.47 | 71.33 | 84.72 | 63.10 | 59.57 | 62.04 |
| EV / FCF | — | 114.96 | 92.92 | 94.95 | 222.93 | 97.22 | 60.30 | 87.27 | 91.30 | 81.88 | 100.16 |
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 | 99.2% | 99.2% | 100.5% | 100.5% | 99.7% | 103.1% | 99.0% | 103.5% | 103.6% | 105.7% | 102.7% |
| Operating Margin | 35.7% | 35.7% | 33.1% | 30.6% | 31.6% | 34.9% | 33.9% | 35.8% | 40.1% | 44.6% | 41.4% |
| Net Profit Margin | 28.3% | 28.3% | 26.3% | 24.7% | 25.6% | 28.2% | 28.2% | 28.1% | 28.2% | 29.8% | 27.3% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 4.8% | 4.8% | 4.2% | 4.0% | 4.2% | 4.8% | 4.9% | 4.6% | 5.0% | 5.3% | 4.8% |
| ROA | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.6% | 0.6% | 0.6% | 0.6% | 0.7% | 0.6% |
| ROIC | 1.3% | 1.3% | 1.1% | 1.0% | 1.2% | 1.5% | 1.4% | 1.4% | 1.7% | 2.0% | 2.2% |
| ROCE | 1.7% | 1.7% | 1.4% | 1.3% | 1.6% | 1.9% | 1.8% | 1.8% | 2.2% | 2.7% | 2.9% |
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 | 2.59 | 2.59 | 2.59 | 2.75 | 2.62 | 1.81 | 2.13 | 2.32 | 2.13 | 2.19 | 1.67 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 35.57 | 35.57 | 40.40 | 47.57 | 40.50 | 23.62 | 26.81 | 31.45 | 25.65 | 24.04 | 19.53 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 2.36 | 2.34 | 2.51 | 2.41 | 1.53 | 1.84 | 2.16 | 1.98 | 2.03 | 1.53 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 32.46 | 32.46 | 36.51 | 43.39 | 37.40 | 19.94 | 23.07 | 29.25 | 23.80 | 22.30 | 17.90 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 63.00 | 50.95 | 56.49 | 122.93 | 32.33 | 25.88 | 36.89 | 41.60 | 35.45 | 33.47 |
| Interest Coverage | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.22 | 0.28 | 0.65 | 0.63 | 0.47 | 0.47 | 0.75 | 1.02 | 1.04 |
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 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.09 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.09 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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% | 1.6% | 1.6% | 1.8% | 1.6% | 1.1% | 1.4% | 1.0% | 0.9% | 0.6% | 0.5% |
| Payout Ratio | 65.5% | 65.5% | 74.1% | 77.5% | 78.2% | 69.9% | 66.6% | 62.9% | 44.1% | 31.2% | 29.1% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 1.9% | 2.4% | 2.2% | 2.2% | 2.0% | 1.5% | 2.0% | 1.6% | 2.1% | 2.0% | 1.6% |
| FCF Yield | 1.5% | 1.9% | 2.4% | 2.6% | 1.0% | 1.5% | 2.9% | 2.0% | 2.0% | 2.2% | 1.5% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.2% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.5% | 1.2% | 2.5% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 1.3% | 1.7% | 1.7% | 2.0% | 1.8% | 1.2% | 1.4% | 1.2% | 1.4% | 1.8% | 3.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $280M | $279M | $279M | $279M | $279M | $278M | $277M | $277M | $279M | $284M |
Includes 30+ ratios · 21 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 TFSL stock.
TFS Financial Corporation's current P/E ratio is 52.6x. The historical average is 61.8x. This places it at the 47th percentile of its historical range.
TFS Financial Corporation's current EV/EBITDA is 66.7x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 61.5x.
TFS Financial Corporation's return on equity (ROE) is 4.8%. The historical average is 3.6%.
Based on historical data, TFS Financial Corporation is trading at a P/E of 52.6x. This is at the 47th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
TFS Financial Corporation's current dividend yield is 1.27% with a payout ratio of 65.5%.
TFS Financial Corporation has 99.2% gross margin and 35.7% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
TFS Financial Corporation's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 35.6x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.
Key Metrics
Top Statement Risk
Extreme NIM compression
Metrics are mathematically derived from official filings.
P/B Premium Defies Profitability Reality
TFSL trades at a P/B of 2.65, a significant premium to peers like HOMB at 1.37 and NBTB at 1.38, despite generating a return on equity of just 1.6% compared to their double-digit returns, based on current market data.
This premium appears unsupported by fundamental returns, as the bank's ROE and ROTCE are among the lowest in the peer group. The valuation suggests the market is pricing in either the unique MHC dividend waiver structure or a significant improvement in profitability that has yet to materialize. At a P/TBV of roughly 2.5x, the implied ROTCE expectation far exceeds the current trajectory, creating a disconnect that warrants scrutiny.
ROE Severely Constrained by Asset Mix
TFSL's ROE of 1.6% is driven by a critically low net interest margin of 0.50% and extremely high leverage implied by an 11% equity-to-asset ratio, as reported in its latest quarterly filings.
Decomposing the ROE reveals that while leverage is high, the fundamental earning power of the assets is poor. A NIM of 0.50% is insufficient to generate meaningful returns, even with the balance sheet leveraged nearly 9 times. The low fee income contribution of under 10% fails to offset this core spread weakness, confirming the profitability is structurally strained by the long-duration, fixed-rate mortgage portfolio.
NIM Inflection but Efficiency Deteriorates
The net interest margin showed a welcome expansion to 0.50% in Q3 2026, yet the efficiency ratio concurrently worsened to 62.2% from 60.9% in the prior quarter, suggesting rising non-interest expenses are offsetting core margin gains.
The NIM improvement, while modest in absolute terms, represents a positive directional shift and may indicate asset repricing is finally catching up to deposit costs. However, the erratic efficiency ratio, which has swung between 60.9% and 68.0% over the past year, signals poor operating leverage and a high fixed-cost structure that erodes the benefit of any margin recovery. Investors should monitor whether this NIM uptick is sustainable or a temporary blip.
Zero Provisions Mask Underlying Cyclicality
TFSL reported zero loan loss provisions in Q3 2026, a stark contrast to the $1.5 million expense in Q3 2025, which suggests a highly favorable management view of credit risk in the residential portfolio.
The cessation of provisioning is a positive signal for near-term earnings, but it must be interpreted against the historical volatility seen in the data. Given the company's concentration in Florida and Ohio residential real estate, the zero-provision quarter could indicate management believes the credit cycle has peaked. However, this creates a risk that any deterioration in collateral values, particularly from insurance cost pressures in Florida, could necessitate a rapid and material restart to provisioning.
Structural Valuation Gap Versus Regionals
TFSL's P/B ratio of 2.65 is more than double that of direct peers like Home Bancshares (1.37) and NBT Bancorp (1.38), despite posting an ROE that is a fraction of their levels.
This disconnect appears structural, driven by TFSL's MHC status and dividend waiver policy, which creates a yield profile not directly comparable to fully public banks. However, from a pure returns perspective, TFSL's premium is difficult to justify. The gap suggests the market is valuing TFSL for its capital structure and dividend sustainability rather than its operating profitability, which lags the peer group significantly on every metric.
Leverage Ratio Misstates True Capital Strength
The equity-to-assets ratio of 11% implies high leverage and potentially strong ROE mechanics, but it obscures the fact that over 96% of assets are in long-duration securities and loans subject to significant interest rate risk.
A standard analysis might view the 9x asset multiplier as amplifying a small ROA into a respectable ROE, but this is misleading. The core issue is not the quantity of equity but the quality of the assets it supports. The extreme concentration in fixed-rate assets means a small adverse move in rates could generate unrealized losses that dwarf the tangible equity base, a risk the simple leverage ratio fails to capture. The correct metric is not leverage, but the ratio of tangible common equity to the duration-sensitive assets.