Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 29.8x · EV/EBITDA 9.3x · ROE N/A. (2007–2025 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 | $736M | $599M | $709M | $1.8B | $2.3B | $1.9B | $1.8B | $2.1B | $1.6B | $2.2B | $2.2B |
| Enterprise Value | $1.1B | $981M | $1.2B | $2.4B | $2.1B | $1.8B | $1.9B | $2.3B | $1.8B | $2.5B | $2.5B |
| P/E Ratio → | 29.80 | 22.47 | 805.45 | — | 12.91 | 3.63 | 17.26 | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 2.48 | 2.02 | 2.02 | 4.02 | 5.62 | 4.63 | 4.70 | 4.85 | 4.56 | 7.49 | 8.14 |
| P/B Ratio | — | — | — | — | 3.54 | 3.16 | 29.21 | — | — | 226.79 | 33.44 |
| P/FCF | 5.79 | 4.72 | 6.86 | 9.71 | 8.44 | 7.33 | 10.96 | 587.29 | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 5.79 | 4.72 | 6.85 | 9.69 | 8.43 | 7.32 | 10.84 | 193.63 | — | — | — |
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 | — | 3.31 | 3.47 | 5.42 | 5.04 | 4.28 | 4.93 | 5.44 | 5.26 | 8.41 | 9.31 |
| EV / EBITDA | 9.27 | 8.14 | 12.82 | — | 8.21 | 7.58 | 13.10 | 18.54 | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | 9.42 | 9.55 | 12.75 | 12.26 | 7.95 | 7.63 | 13.87 | 18.95 | — | — | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 7.73 | 11.80 | 13.11 | 7.56 | 6.78 | 11.49 | 659.18 | — | — | — |
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% | 97.9% | 98.6% | 99.7% | 83.0% | 99.2% | 68.4% | 90.6% | 93.5% | 99.3% |
| Operating Margin | 40.1% | 40.1% | 26.5% | -213.5% | 61.0% | 56.1% | 36.7% | 28.0% | -68.9% | -25.9% | -18.9% |
| Net Profit Margin | 8.1% | 8.1% | 0.3% | -226.4% | 42.6% | 127.7% | 27.3% | 5.0% | -81.5% | -39.2% | -29.8% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | — | — | — | -654.9% | 27.8% | 158.1% | 169.5% | — | — | -305.5% | -101.0% |
| ROA | 6.4% | 6.4% | 0.2% | -127.5% | 15.7% | 62.7% | 22.1% | 5.9% | -60.2% | -17.8% | -12.3% |
| ROIC | 54.0% | 54.0% | 28.7% | -205.8% | 43.0% | 56.8% | 68.5% | 87.8% | -109.0% | -17.3% | -12.9% |
| ROCE | 50.9% | 50.9% | 36.7% | -148.9% | 24.5% | 31.1% | 32.2% | 41.8% | -63.5% | -13.4% | -8.9% |
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 | — | — | — | — | 0.64 | 0.79 | 7.24 | — | — | 40.63 | 5.59 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 4.96 | 4.96 | 6.30 | — | 1.65 | 2.04 | 3.10 | 3.43 | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | — | — | — | -0.37 | -0.24 | 1.43 | — | — | 27.87 | 4.78 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 3.17 | 3.17 | 5.37 | — | -0.95 | -0.62 | 0.61 | 2.02 | — | — | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | 3.01 | 4.94 | 3.40 | -0.88 | -0.55 | 0.54 | 71.89 | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 3.14 | 3.14 | 2.90 | 9.05 | 34.22 | 7.45 | 4.69 | 3.36 | -4.15 | -0.51 | -1.09 |
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 | 1.13 | 1.13 | 4.69 | 0.84 | 30.58 | 4.61 | 15.41 | 7.50 | 2.23 | 4.72 | 4.17 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.13 | 1.13 | 4.69 | 0.84 | 30.53 | 4.61 | 15.41 | 7.48 | 2.23 | 4.71 | 4.16 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.89 | 0.89 | 2.28 | 0.33 | 25.71 | 3.84 | 11.32 | 4.33 | 1.45 | 3.35 | 3.35 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.75 | 1.00 | 0.94 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.70 | 1.06 | 1.04 | 0.49 | 0.39 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | — | — | 1.13 | — | — | 208.93 | — | 26.40 | 1.73 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 57.61 | 85.05 | 106.45 | 102.64 | 100.60 | 114.65 | 99.89 | 85.24 | 100.54 | 86.41 |
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 | 3.4% | 4.5% | 0.1% | — | 7.7% | 27.5% | 5.8% | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 17.3% | 21.2% | 14.6% | 10.3% | 11.9% | 13.6% | 9.1% | 0.2% | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 5.5% | 1.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 5.5% | 1.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $178M | $160M | $155M | $186M | $164M | $161M | $156M | $153M | $149M | $146M |
Single-product revenue concentration
Based on reported figures, Ironwood's forward P/E of 3.50 suggests the market is heavily discounting the terminal value of the linaclotide franchise while assigning minimal credit to the early-stage pipeline, a valuation gap that appears wider than peers with more diversified or younger product portfolios.
The discrepancy between the TTM P/E of 27.53 and the forward multiple indicates that investors are pricing in a significant, near-term contraction in earnings. This valuation profile suggests the market views the current cash flow as a 'melting ice cube' rather than a sustainable base for future growth.
As reported in financial statements, Ironwood's ROIC has exhibited extreme volatility, ranging from a negative 11.9% in 2025Q1 to a peak of 38.8% in 2026Q1, reflecting the structural impact of collaboration-based revenue recognition on the company's ability to generate returns on its invested capital.
The erratic nature of these returns suggests that traditional ROIC metrics may be poor indicators of operational success for this business model. Investors should monitor whether the recent pivot toward rare disease assets can stabilize these returns as the company moves away from its legacy royalty-heavy structure.
According to recent SEC filings, Ironwood's asset turnover remains consistently low, hovering near 0.25, which highlights the firm's reliance on intangible collaboration rights rather than tangible productive assets to drive its commercial footprint and overall revenue generation within the specialty pharmaceutical sector.
The significant fluctuations in DSO, which reached 161 days in 2025Q4, suggest that the company's cash conversion cycle is highly sensitive to the timing of profit-sharing settlements with its commercial partner. This lack of working capital predictability warrants further investigation into the underlying payment terms of the collaboration.
As disclosed in financial statements, Ironwood's leverage profile appears strained, with an EV/EBITDA ratio of 8.80 and an interest coverage ratio that has fluctuated significantly, reaching a low of -1.31 in 2025Q1, indicating that debt service capacity remains highly sensitive to quarterly revenue volatility.
The absence of positive equity, combined with a substantial debt load, suggests a capital structure that may limit the company's ability to pursue further inorganic growth without additional dilution. The reliance on external financing to support R&D suggests that the firm's financial flexibility is currently quite limited.
Based on an analysis of historical income statements, the most commonly misapplied ratio for Ironwood is the gross margin, which frequently appears near 100% due to collaboration accounting, thereby obscuring the true economic cost of goods sold and the underlying profitability of the core franchise.
Investors should instead focus on operating margins and free cash flow conversion, as these metrics better capture the actual commercial spend and R&D investment required to maintain the business. Relying on gross margin as a proxy for efficiency is fundamentally flawed given the company's unique profit-sharing structure.
Includes 30+ ratios · 19 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 IRWD stock.
Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 29.8x. The historical average is 14.1x. This places it at the 100th percentile of its historical range.
Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 9.3x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 11.4x.
Based on historical data, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is trading at a P/E of 29.8x. This is at the 100th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc. has 100.0% gross margin and 40.1% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 5.0x, indicating high leverage. A ratio above 4x may signal elevated financial risk.