Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 50.9x · EV/EBITDA 829.3x · ROE 17.7%. (2007–2016 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2016 | FY 2015 | FY 2014 | FY 2013 | FY 2012 | FY 2011 | FY 2010 | FY 2009 | FY 2008 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | $203M | $14M | $6M | $4M | $13M | $11M | $17M | $55M | $91M | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $260M | $71M | $175M | $147M | $94M | $73M | $101M | $73M | $102M | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 50.93 | 3.47 | — | — | 25.43 | 4.34 | 2.14 | 6.87 | 16.48 | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 0.44 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.21 | 0.42 | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 8.63 | 0.59 | 0.27 | 0.12 | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.30 | 1.36 | 3.24 | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | 0.37 | — | — | 3.41 | 15.18 | — | — |
| P/OCF | — | — | — | — | 0.37 | — | — | 3.35 | 14.99 | — | — |
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 2016 | FY 2015 | FY 2014 | FY 2013 | FY 2012 | FY 2011 | FY 2010 | FY 2009 | FY 2008 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | 0.15 | 0.39 | 0.37 | 0.21 | 0.12 | 0.22 | 0.28 | 0.47 | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 829.32 | 225.69 | — | — | 29.09 | 18.70 | 8.50 | 6.39 | 12.07 | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 1116.17 | 31.80 | — | — | 35.18 | 17.50 | 8.74 | 0.47 | 0.50 | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — | — | 2.66 | — | — | 4.55 | 17.14 | — | — |
Margins and return-on-capital ratios measuring operating efficiency
Full margin charts and quarterly trend are on the Earnings History page
| Metric | TTM | FY 2016 | FY 2015 | FY 2014 | FY 2013 | FY 2012 | FY 2011 | FY 2010 | FY 2009 | FY 2008 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 0.6% | 0.6% | 0.8% | 1.1% | 1.5% | 1.9% | 3.6% | 5.5% | 4.7% | 4.6% | 42.3% |
| Operating Margin | 0.1% | 0.1% | -1.2% | -5.4% | 0.6% | 0.6% | 2.5% | 4.4% | 3.8% | 3.2% | -338.2% |
| Net Profit Margin | 0.9% | 0.9% | -2.7% | -6.7% | 0.1% | 0.4% | 1.8% | 3.1% | 2.6% | 2.1% | -344.2% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2016 | FY 2015 | FY 2014 | FY 2013 | FY 2012 | FY 2011 | FY 2010 | FY 2009 | FY 2008 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 17.7% | 17.7% | -42.6% | -55.3% | 0.9% | 4.5% | 16.6% | 23.4% | 22.3% | 37.1% | -449.2% |
| ROA | 1.8% | 1.8% | -4.2% | -9.9% | 0.2% | 1.4% | 5.3% | 10.4% | 11.9% | 19.4% | -162.5% |
| ROIC | 0.1% | 0.1% | -2.2% | -10.2% | 1.7% | 2.1% | 8.6% | 17.1% | 18.2% | 32.5% | — |
| ROCE | 0.8% | 0.8% | -11.5% | -24.9% | 3.5% | 6.1% | 23.1% | 32.2% | 32.3% | 54.0% | -222.7% |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2016 | FY 2015 | FY 2014 | FY 2013 | FY 2012 | FY 2011 | FY 2010 | FY 2009 | FY 2008 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | 2.55 | 2.55 | 8.22 | 4.31 | 1.55 | 1.21 | 1.64 | 0.89 | 0.50 | 0.40 | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | 191.19 | 191.19 | — | — | 29.64 | 18.15 | 7.75 | 3.14 | 1.64 | 1.34 | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 2.42 | 7.88 | 4.09 | 1.30 | 1.06 | — | — | — | — | -0.68 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 181.62 | 181.62 | — | — | 25.00 | 15.88 | 7.06 | 1.59 | 1.38 | 1.09 | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | 2.29 | — | — | 1.14 | 1.96 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 0.08 | 0.08 | -0.83 | -21.76 | 5.51 | 215.25 | 78.77 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 20.89 | -56.52 |
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2016 | FY 2015 | FY 2014 | FY 2013 | FY 2012 | FY 2011 | FY 2010 | FY 2009 | FY 2008 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 1.17 | 1.17 | 0.88 | 0.97 | 1.11 | 1.55 | 1.36 | 1.56 | 2.19 | 2.21 | 1.81 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.08 | 1.08 | 0.83 | 0.89 | 1.00 | 1.30 | 1.16 | 1.25 | 1.48 | 1.31 | 1.81 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.29 | 0.10 | 0.09 | 0.87 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 2.91 | 1.55 | 1.44 | 1.76 | 3.56 | 2.25 | 2.51 | 4.16 | 4.62 | 0.47 |
| Inventory Turnover | 35.57 | 35.57 | 36.42 | 24.80 | 29.48 | 21.37 | 15.19 | 12.79 | 12.34 | 11.02 | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 94.63 | 67.44 | 92.76 | 54.93 | 36.46 | 76.49 | 55.65 | 16.74 | 15.69 | 51.39 |
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 2016 | FY 2015 | FY 2014 | FY 2013 | FY 2012 | FY 2011 | FY 2010 | FY 2009 | FY 2008 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2016 | FY 2015 | FY 2014 | FY 2013 | FY 2012 | FY 2011 | FY 2010 | FY 2009 | FY 2008 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 2.0% | 28.9% | — | — | 3.9% | 23.1% | 46.8% | 14.6% | 6.1% | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | 267.6% | — | — | 29.3% | 6.6% | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 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% | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $4M | $4M | $4M | $4M | $4M | $3M | $3M | $3M | $2M | $162116 |
Regulatory and liquidity insolvency
Based on reported financial data, CALI trades at an EV/EBITDA of 830.35, a valuation multiple that appears disconnected from the company's underlying fundamental reality and suggests that investors are pricing in speculative optionality rather than the firm's actual, highly constrained earnings power and shrinking asset base.
The extreme EV/EBITDA multiple indicates that the market may be struggling to assign a rational value to a business with near-zero operating margins. Investors should monitor whether this premium is driven by the potential of the at188.com platform or if it represents a mispricing of the company's core, low-margin brokerage activities.
As reported in historical financial statements, CALI has struggled to maintain positive returns, with ROIC frequently dipping into negative territory, such as the -2.7% observed in 2015Q4, which underscores the company's inability to generate meaningful value from its capital base in a highly competitive, low-margin environment.
The inability to consistently generate positive ROIC suggests that the company's capital allocation is failing to overcome the structural costs of its logistics operations. This trend warrants further investigation into whether the firm's reliance on debt to fund inventory cycles is actually destroying shareholder value rather than facilitating growth.
According to quarterly filings, the company's cash conversion cycle has remained highly volatile, peaking at 508 days in 2015Q2, which highlights the extreme difficulty CALI faces in managing its working capital and collecting receivables from its fragmented wholesale client base in the parallel import market.
The extended and erratic CCC suggests that the company lacks leverage over its customers, forcing it to carry significant inventory and receivables for extended periods. This inefficiency appears to be a structural drag on the business, as it necessitates constant external financing to bridge the gap between vehicle procurement and final sale.
Based on the most recent balance sheet data, CALI maintains a current ratio of 1.20, which, when combined with a cash balance of only $3M against massive revenue, suggests a precarious liquidity position that leaves the firm exceptionally vulnerable to any disruption in its inventory-to-cash conversion cycle.
The company's liquidity profile appears inadequate for a business model that relies on high-volume, capital-intensive vehicle imports. Any minor delay in customs clearance or a sudden shift in regulatory requirements could lead to a liquidity crisis, as the firm lacks the cash reserves to absorb even short-term operational shocks.
The most commonly misapplied metric for CALI is the top-line revenue figure, which, as reported in financial statements, appears to be recognized on a principal basis, thereby obscuring the company's true role as a low-margin service intermediary rather than a high-value automotive manufacturer or retailer.
Investors should focus on gross profit per unit rather than total revenue to better understand the company's actual earning power. Relying on standard P/S multiples for this business model is misleading, as it ignores the fact that the vast majority of reported revenue is simply a pass-through cost for imported vehicles.
Includes 30+ ratios · 10 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 CALI stock.
China Auto Logistics Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 50.9x. The historical average is 9.8x. This places it at the 100th percentile of its historical range.
China Auto Logistics Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 829.3x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 14.9x.
China Auto Logistics Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 17.7%. The historical average is -42.5%.
Based on historical data, China Auto Logistics Inc. is trading at a P/E of 50.9x. This is at the 100th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
China Auto Logistics Inc. has 0.6% gross margin and 0.1% operating margin.
China Auto Logistics Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 191.2x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.