Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -0.3x · EV/EBITDA N/A · ROE -79.0%. (1999–2025 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 | $9M | $4M | $12M | $254M | $137M | $212M | $231M | $283M | $207M | $611M | $838M |
| Enterprise Value | $25M | $21M | $24M | $261M | $140M | $253M | $264M | $310M | $217M | $625M | $856M |
| P/E Ratio → | -0.35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 189.92 | — | 314.29 |
| P/S Ratio | 1.72 | 0.75 | 1.42 | 14.32 | 5.33 | 5.59 | 7.86 | 6.78 | 5.82 | 19.26 | 25.58 |
| P/B Ratio | 0.38 | 0.23 | 0.41 | 5.28 | 1.96 | 2.83 | 2.68 | 2.87 | 2.07 | 6.25 | 7.89 |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | 94.92 | — | 40.37 | 137.55 | 146.24 |
| P/OCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | 72.63 | 80.82 | 31.33 | 130.55 | 105.86 |
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 | — | 4.18 | 2.89 | 14.72 | 5.43 | 6.66 | 8.97 | 7.44 | 6.13 | 19.72 | 26.13 |
| EV / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | 129.35 | 52.34 | 38.06 | — | 133.17 |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 55.30 | — | 175.87 |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | 108.39 | — | 42.47 | 140.87 | 149.35 |
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% | 94.6% | 61.0% | 69.0% | 71.9% | 81.5% | 75.4% | 92.4% | 100.0% | 99.4% |
| Operating Margin | -146.2% | -146.2% | -259.2% | -116.3% | -86.4% | -29.5% | -11.7% | 4.9% | 11.1% | -29.1% | 14.9% |
| Net Profit Margin | -353.5% | -353.5% | -271.2% | -118.6% | -20.8% | -34.3% | -44.4% | -8.3% | 3.1% | -31.9% | 8.4% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -79.0% | -79.0% | -58.5% | -35.6% | -7.4% | -16.2% | -14.2% | -3.5% | 1.1% | -9.9% | 2.7% |
| ROA | -37.7% | -37.7% | -35.7% | -26.2% | -5.0% | -10.5% | -9.8% | -2.4% | 0.8% | -7.1% | 1.8% |
| ROIC | -14.8% | -14.8% | -33.6% | -24.2% | -17.8% | -7.2% | -2.1% | 1.3% | 2.6% | -5.9% | 2.9% |
| ROCE | -19.3% | -19.3% | -39.4% | -28.0% | -22.5% | -9.8% | -2.8% | 1.6% | 3.2% | -6.9% | 3.5% |
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 | 1.14 | 1.14 | 0.47 | 0.21 | 0.10 | 0.60 | 0.44 | 0.33 | 0.20 | 0.26 | 0.30 |
| Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | 18.50 | 5.41 | 3.43 | — | 4.97 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 1.07 | 0.43 | 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.54 | 0.38 | 0.28 | 0.11 | 0.15 | 0.17 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — | — | 16.07 | 4.63 | 1.88 | — | 2.77 |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | 13.47 | — | 2.10 | 3.33 | 3.11 |
| Interest Coverage | -6.24 | -6.24 | -33.69 | -54.18 | -3.81 | -6.82 | -13.43 | -2.18 | 3.89 | -6.85 | 2.63 |
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 | 0.49 | 0.49 | 0.39 | 1.13 | 2.14 | 1.63 | 1.57 | 1.79 | 1.48 | 2.12 | 2.11 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.49 | 0.49 | 0.39 | 1.06 | 1.70 | 1.31 | 1.45 | 1.69 | 1.36 | 2.12 | 2.11 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.46 | 0.70 | 0.43 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.55 | 1.12 | 1.36 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.25 | 0.29 | 0.30 | 0.24 | 0.29 | 0.26 | 0.23 | 0.22 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | 15.27 | 2.80 | 3.16 | 4.49 | 11.43 | 1.36 | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 70.65 | 100.28 | 71.01 | 72.35 | 73.52 | 110.18 | 92.91 | 113.31 | 98.17 | 77.66 |
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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.5% | — | 0.3% |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1.1% | — | 2.5% | 0.7% | 0.7% |
| Buyback Yield | 2.4% | 5.5% | 0.9% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.5% | 0.2% | 0.2% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 2.4% | 5.5% | 0.9% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.5% | 0.2% | 0.2% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $3M | $2M | $20M | $20M | $19M | $19M | $19M | $18M | $19M | $19M |
Liquidity and solvency risk
Based on reported financial data, XELB trades at a price-to-sales multiple of 1.74, which appears to reflect a speculative market assessment of its brand portfolio's terminal value rather than a reflection of current cash-generating capabilities, given the absence of meaningful earnings or positive free cash flow.
The lack of a positive P/E ratio and the depressed P/B of 0.39 suggest that investors are pricing the company as a distressed asset. This valuation implies that the market is heavily discounting the firm's ability to stabilize its royalty streams, effectively treating the equity as a high-risk option on the potential liquidation value of its intellectual property.
As reported in recent financial statements, XELB's ROIC has consistently trended into negative territory, reaching -4.3% in 2026Q1, which indicates that the company is currently destroying shareholder value rather than compounding it through its asset-light licensing model and brand management activities.
The persistent negative ROIC suggests that the capital invested in acquiring and maintaining legacy brands is not generating sufficient returns to cover the associated corporate overhead. This trend warrants further investigation into whether the current brand portfolio can ever achieve the scale necessary to generate positive returns on invested capital.
According to quarterly filings, XELB's asset turnover remains stagnant at 0.03, highlighting a structural inability to effectively monetize its brand assets, while the volatility in DSO, which reached 133 days in 2025Q3, suggests significant friction in the collection of royalty payments from third-party licensees.
The inability to improve asset turnover despite the shift to an asset-light model indicates that the company's core revenue-generating engine is stalling. Investors should monitor the DSO trend closely, as extended collection cycles may indicate that licensees are facing their own financial pressures, further threatening XELB's cash flow stability.
Based on the company's reported figures, the debt-to-equity ratio has escalated to 1.33 as of 2026Q1, signaling an increasing reliance on external financing to sustain operations as the firm's internal cash generation remains deeply negative and insufficient to cover its existing debt service obligations.
The negative interest coverage ratio of -3.07 confirms that the company is unable to service its debt from operating income, creating a precarious financial position. This leverage profile suggests that the firm may face significant refinancing risks if it cannot rapidly pivot toward a self-sustaining cash flow model.
While the 100% gross margin is frequently cited as a hallmark of XELB's asset-light licensing model, this metric is commonly misapplied by analysts as a proxy for profitability, failing to account for the substantial, fixed SG&A expenses required to maintain brand relevance in a declining media environment.
Investors should prioritize operating cash flow and EBITDA over gross margin, as the latter ignores the significant cash-based talent and marketing costs that are essential to the business model. Relying on gross margin alone obscures the fundamental reality that the company's operating structure is currently disconnected from its revenue-generating capacity.
Includes 30+ ratios · 27 years · Updated daily
DCF models, multiple analysis, and analyst estimates.
10-year return with dividends reinvested.
See how regular investing compounds over time.
Compare growth, multiples, and margins vs sector.
Quick answers to the most common questions about buying XELB stock.
Xcel Brands, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -0.3x. The historical average is 130.4x.
Xcel Brands, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -79.0%. The historical average is -44.8%.
Based on historical data, Xcel Brands, Inc. is trading at a P/E of -0.3x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Xcel Brands, Inc. has 100.0% gross margin and -146.2% operating margin.