Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -0.6x · EV/EBITDA 4.1x · ROE 6.3%. (2002–2025 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 | $24M | $19M | $28M | $158M | $160M | $159M | $134M | $166M | — | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $186M | $180M | $174M | $298M | $346M | $293M | $298M | $299M | — | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | -0.63 | — | — | — | 8.67 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 0.14 | 0.11 | 0.15 | 0.72 | 0.45 | 0.56 | 0.91 | 0.74 | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 0.12 | 0.10 | 0.16 | 0.91 | 1.89 | 2.50 | 1.50 | 0.52 | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | — | 10.19 | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 0.61 | 0.48 | 0.80 | 8.98 | 2.03 | 2.32 | 2.68 | — | — | — | — |
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 | — | 1.09 | 0.90 | 1.35 | 0.96 | 1.03 | 2.01 | 1.33 | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 4.08 | 3.97 | 4.24 | 4.02 | 1.69 | 1.97 | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | 9.86 | 8.21 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | 18.73 | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | 10.8% | 10.8% | 40.9% | 45.4% | 65.1% | 63.2% | 27.3% | 24.1% | 50.9% | 48.8% | 24.2% |
| Operating Margin | -4.0% | -4.0% | -6.1% | 8.0% | 42.4% | 36.2% | -176.6% | -468.2% | 40.7% | 189.3% | -14.5% |
| Net Profit Margin | 7.2% | 7.2% | -16.4% | -1.4% | 5.2% | -9.9% | -154.9% | -467.8% | 20.3% | 141.7% | -111.8% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 6.3% | 6.3% | -17.9% | -2.4% | 25.0% | -36.9% | -113.0% | -138.9% | 4.1% | 90.4% | -331.1% |
| ROA | 2.7% | 2.7% | -7.0% | -0.6% | 4.2% | -7.7% | -49.3% | -78.8% | 2.5% | 36.2% | -19.6% |
| ROIC | -1.5% | -1.5% | -2.7% | 4.5% | 48.8% | 34.4% | -55.8% | -71.3% | 4.9% | 50.3% | -2.2% |
| ROCE | -1.8% | -1.8% | -3.3% | 5.2% | 51.7% | 38.9% | -70.6% | -87.7% | 5.4% | 54.9% | -2.8% |
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 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 0.91 | 1.13 | 2.58 | 2.86 | 1.87 | 0.46 | 0.51 | 0.38 | 8.56 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 4.17 | 4.17 | 4.03 | 2.67 | 1.07 | 1.23 | — | — | 3.61 | 0.50 | 9.03 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.84 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 2.19 | 2.10 | 1.82 | 0.42 | 0.47 | -0.01 | 8.56 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 3.56 | 3.56 | 3.55 | 1.89 | 0.91 | 0.90 | — | — | 3.34 | -0.02 | 9.03 |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | 8.54 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | -0.23 | -0.23 | -0.58 | 0.91 | 1.79 | -2.53 | -33.63 | -28.50 | 4.30 | 8.46 | -0.69 |
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 | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.70 | 0.67 | 0.53 | 0.72 | 0.58 | 0.67 | 0.89 | 3.14 | 0.77 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.70 | 0.67 | 0.53 | 0.72 | 0.58 | 0.67 | 0.86 | 3.07 | 0.74 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.25 | 0.43 | 0.20 | 0.40 | 0.05 | 0.13 | 0.29 | 2.82 | 0.00 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.36 | 0.45 | 0.45 | 0.74 | 0.73 | 0.43 | 0.38 | 0.11 | 0.23 | 0.32 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 23.39 | 18.32 | 46.01 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 26.71 | 49.51 | 38.06 | 38.60 | 47.10 | 100.43 | 88.94 | 151.81 | 41.86 | 134.18 |
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 | — | — | — | — | 11.5% | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | 9.8% | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 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% | — | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $16M | $16M | $16M | $17M | $16M | $16M | $12M | $16M | $13M | $9M |
Liquidity and solvency constraints
According to recent market data, Battalion Oil trades at a P/S ratio of 0.12, which, when compared to the broader energy sector, suggests that investors are heavily discounting the company's future earnings potential due to persistent operational losses and a lack of clear, sustainable growth catalysts.
The negative TTM P/E ratio of -0.55 underscores the company's inability to generate consistent bottom-line earnings, rendering traditional valuation metrics largely ineffective for assessing intrinsic value. The forward P/E of 5.35 appears to imply an optimistic market expectation for a turnaround that remains unsupported by the current trajectory of operating margins.
Based on reported figures, Battalion Oil's ROIC has frequently dipped into negative territory, including a -0.7% reading in 2026Q1, which indicates that the company is failing to generate returns on its invested capital that exceed its cost of capital, leading to long-term value erosion.
The persistent inability to maintain positive ROIC suggests that the company's capital allocation strategy is struggling to overcome the high costs associated with its sour gas infrastructure. Investors should monitor whether future capital expenditures can actually drive incremental returns or if they will continue to be absorbed by maintenance requirements.
As reported in financial statements, Battalion Oil’s asset turnover ratio has remained stagnant at approximately 0.09 to 0.10 over the last several quarters, signaling that the company is not effectively utilizing its asset base to generate meaningful revenue relative to its capital investment.
This low turnover ratio is characteristic of an entity struggling with production declines and limited operational scale. The lack of improvement in this metric suggests that the company's infrastructure-heavy model is not achieving the necessary throughput to optimize its asset utilization.
According to the company's quarterly balance sheets, the current ratio has consistently hovered below 1.0, reaching 0.90 in 2026Q1, which indicates that Battalion Oil lacks a sufficient liquidity buffer to comfortably meet its near-term obligations without relying on external capital or potential asset divestitures.
The reliance on a quick ratio that mirrors the current ratio suggests that inventory is not a significant source of liquidity, further highlighting the company's dependence on cash flow from operations. This tight liquidity position warrants investigation into the company's ability to navigate potential commodity price volatility without further balance sheet strain.
The most commonly misapplied metric for Battalion Oil is the EV/EBITDA multiple, which, at 4.01, obscures the company's underlying cash burn and the high maintenance capital requirements inherent in its specialized sour gas production profile compared to conventional Permian Basin operators.
Using EV/EBITDA as a primary valuation tool for this business model is misleading because it ignores the significant non-cash impairments and the high cost of environmental compliance that effectively reduce the company's true cash-generating capacity. Analysts should instead focus on FCF yield or asset-based valuation to better capture the reality of the company's financial position.
Includes 30+ ratios · 23 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 BATL stock.
Battalion Oil Corporation's current P/E ratio is -0.6x. The historical average is 8.7x.
Battalion Oil Corporation's current EV/EBITDA is 4.1x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 3.2x.
Battalion Oil Corporation's return on equity (ROE) is 6.3%. The historical average is -46.0%.
Based on historical data, Battalion Oil Corporation is trading at a P/E of -0.6x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Battalion Oil Corporation has 10.8% gross margin and -4.0% operating margin.
Battalion Oil Corporation's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 4.2x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.