Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 0.2x · EV/EBITDA 1.3x · ROE 18.5%. (2008–2025 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 | $69M | $153M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | $850M | $934M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | 0.22 | 0.43 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 0.09 | 0.20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | 0.04 | 0.07 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | — | 1.22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | 1.27 | 1.40 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 2.67 | 2.25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 | 41.6% | 41.6% | 36.8% | 17.3% | 37.5% | 32.7% | 21.1% | 14.8% | 32.5% | 33.9% | 61.9% |
| Operating Margin | 41.6% | 41.6% | -39.3% | -77.8% | -28.8% | -30.3% | -151.0% | -366.5% | -1222.9% | -2986.5% | -3097.9% |
| Net Profit Margin | 47.6% | 47.6% | -38.5% | -82.0% | -43.6% | -55.5% | -232.8% | -576.2% | -8123.6% | -3013.3% | -3097.1% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 18.5% | 18.5% | -12.0% | -25.6% | -16.2% | -13.5% | -132.2% | -149.5% | -258.3% | -50.9% | -15.2% |
| ROA | 14.2% | 14.2% | -10.7% | -22.8% | -14.9% | -12.8% | -102.0% | -127.4% | -245.2% | -50.2% | -15.0% |
| ROIC | 9.9% | 9.9% | -8.9% | -17.6% | -7.7% | -5.5% | -58.2% | -63.7% | -28.2% | -37.7% | -11.4% |
| ROCE | 13.7% | 13.7% | -12.1% | -23.7% | -10.4% | -7.3% | -77.9% | -87.1% | -38.6% | -50.3% | -15.2% |
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 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.16 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.00 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 1.24 | 1.24 | 12.03 | — | 1.99 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.36 | -0.03 | -0.02 | 0.00 | -0.04 | -0.16 | -0.25 | 0.04 | 0.01 | -0.01 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 1.17 | 1.17 | -9.75 | — | 0.16 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 36.60 | 36.60 | -57.02 | -43.11 | -36.19 | -55.47 | -1.17 | -1.75 | -49.85 | -4661.70 | -79391.56 |
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 | 4.18 | 4.18 | 3.75 | 1.38 | 1.49 | 5.74 | 1.53 | 6.58 | 0.41 | 0.43 | 1.69 |
| Quick Ratio | 4.18 | 4.18 | 3.75 | 1.38 | 1.49 | 5.74 | 1.53 | 6.58 | 0.41 | 0.43 | 1.69 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.65 | 0.39 | 0.60 | 1.45 | 0.58 | 5.22 | 0.31 | 0.19 | 1.22 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.24 | 0.19 | 0.22 | 0.29 | 0.12 | 0.45 | 0.19 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.00 |
| 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 | 13.6% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 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 | 100.0% | 233.3% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 100.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 100.0% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $318M | $217M | $103M | $43M | $29M | $10M | $4M | $3M | $3M | $2M |
Operational leverage and dilution
According to recent market data, CleanSpark trades at a P/S of 0.12 and an EV/EBITDA of 1.31, which, based on reported figures, appears to reflect extreme investor skepticism regarding the company's ability to maintain profitability following the recent Bitcoin halving event and subsequent network difficulty increases.
The exceptionally low P/S and EV/EBITDA multiples suggest that the market is pricing in a high probability of structural impairment rather than temporary cyclicality. Investors should monitor whether these depressed valuations represent a value opportunity or a rational response to the company's inability to generate consistent positive free cash flow under current mining economics.
As reported in financial statements, CleanSpark's ROIC has collapsed from a positive 8.9% in 2024Q2 to a negative 2.8% by 2026Q2, indicating that the company's aggressive reinvestment strategy is failing to generate returns that exceed the cost of capital in the current post-halving mining environment.
The sharp decline in ROIC highlights the diminishing marginal utility of new ASIC hardware deployments when faced with rising global network difficulty. This trend suggests that the company's capital allocation strategy may be prioritizing hashrate growth at the expense of long-term shareholder value creation, warranting further investigation into the hurdle rates used for new infrastructure projects.
Based on quarterly filings, CleanSpark's asset turnover ratio has remained stagnant at a low 0.04 as of 2026Q2, which, compared to historical levels of 0.09, suggests that the company's massive investment in physical data centers is not yet translating into proportional revenue generation capacity.
The low asset turnover ratio implies that the company is carrying a significant amount of underutilized or inefficient infrastructure relative to its current revenue base. This inefficiency may be exacerbated by the rapid obsolescence of mining hardware, which forces the company to constantly cycle capital into new equipment without achieving a stable, high-velocity revenue stream.
As evidenced by recent balance sheet data, CleanSpark's debt-to-equity ratio has surged to 1.82 in 2026Q2 from near-zero levels in 2024, signaling a rapid shift toward debt-funded expansion that significantly increases the company's risk profile during periods of Bitcoin price volatility.
The dramatic increase in leverage, coupled with a negative interest coverage ratio of -54.45, suggests that the company's ability to service its debt obligations is becoming increasingly precarious. Investors should monitor whether the company will be forced to pursue further dilutive equity offerings to manage these liabilities if mining margins do not recover.
The market frequently misapplies 'nominal hashrate' as the primary indicator of value, which, based on reported figures, obscures the critical impact of fleet efficiency and power costs on the company's actual ability to generate sustainable cash flow in a high-difficulty mining environment.
Focusing on hashrate alone ignores the 'all-in sustaining cost' per Bitcoin, which is the more appropriate metric for evaluating the company's true earning power. Analysts should instead prioritize the Joules per Terahash (J/TH) efficiency metric and the cost of power procurement, as these factors determine whether the company's hashrate is actually profitable or merely a vanity metric.
Includes 30+ ratios · 18 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 CLSKW stock.
CleanSpark, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 0.2x. The historical average is 0.4x.
CleanSpark, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 1.3x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 1.4x.
CleanSpark, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 18.5%. The historical average is -95.3%.
Based on historical data, CleanSpark, Inc. is trading at a P/E of 0.2x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
CleanSpark, Inc.'s current dividend yield is 13.63%.
CleanSpark, Inc. has 41.6% gross margin and 41.6% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
CleanSpark, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 1.2x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.