Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 26.5x · EV/EBITDA 11.3x · ROE 7.8%. (1996–2025 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 | $26.8B | $26.1B | $23.6B | $21.4B | $14.3B | $32.4B | $48.0B | $43.1B | $31.8B | $34.5B | $27.5B |
| Enterprise Value | $32.9B | $31.4B | $28.7B | $26.8B | $20.4B | $36.2B | $51.7B | $46.9B | $34.9B | $37.3B | $30.7B |
| P/E Ratio → | 26.50 | 29.12 | — | — | — | 53.30 | 40.76 | 36.89 | 29.22 | 20.91 | 18.99 |
| P/S Ratio | 1.32 | 1.46 | 1.31 | 1.18 | 0.80 | 1.89 | 2.77 | 2.51 | 1.75 | 1.94 | 1.12 |
| P/B Ratio | 2.16 | 2.37 | 1.96 | 1.77 | 1.07 | 2.24 | 4.03 | 3.41 | 2.62 | 2.87 | 2.03 |
| P/FCF | 26.27 | 29.19 | 17.45 | 11.05 | — | 22.24 | 22.28 | 25.43 | 33.91 | 34.17 | 26.52 |
| P/OCF | 20.19 | 22.43 | 13.92 | 9.27 | — | 16.82 | 18.19 | 18.94 | 17.85 | 18.47 | 14.42 |
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 | — | 1.76 | 1.59 | 1.48 | 1.15 | 2.11 | 2.99 | 2.74 | 1.93 | 2.10 | 1.25 |
| EV / EBITDA | 11.28 | 12.30 | 14.98 | 23.41 | 280.10 | 19.27 | 22.19 | 20.66 | 12.43 | 14.68 | 9.76 |
| EV / EBIT | 20.19 | 20.71 | 62.44 | — | — | 53.73 | 30.69 | 27.27 | 20.46 | 23.02 | 22.31 |
| EV / FCF | — | 35.11 | 21.21 | 13.85 | — | 24.81 | 24.00 | 27.69 | 37.25 | 36.91 | 29.68 |
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 | 45.2% | 45.2% | 43.1% | 41.0% | 40.4% | 41.8% | 45.7% | 46.4% | 47.2% | 46.0% | 43.3% |
| Operating Margin | 8.0% | 8.0% | 2.9% | -0.6% | -8.6% | 3.2% | 7.3% | 8.0% | 9.5% | 8.5% | 7.7% |
| Net Profit Margin | 5.0% | 5.0% | -3.9% | -2.6% | -9.0% | 19.3% | 6.9% | 6.8% | 6.0% | 9.3% | 5.9% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 7.8% | 7.8% | -5.8% | -3.7% | -11.6% | 25.2% | 9.7% | 9.4% | 9.0% | 13.0% | 11.5% |
| ROA | 3.2% | 3.2% | -2.4% | -1.6% | -5.2% | 11.3% | 4.3% | 4.4% | 4.2% | 5.8% | 4.6% |
| ROIC | 6.4% | 6.4% | 2.3% | -0.5% | -6.1% | 2.5% | 5.9% | 6.5% | 8.6% | 7.2% | 8.7% |
| ROCE | 7.1% | 7.1% | 2.5% | -0.5% | -6.6% | 2.5% | 6.3% | 7.2% | 9.4% | 7.5% | 8.8% |
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 | 0.74 | 0.74 | 0.62 | 0.60 | 0.55 | 0.42 | 0.58 | 0.42 | 0.40 | 0.39 | 0.42 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 3.17 | 3.17 | 3.91 | 6.36 | 100.58 | 3.22 | 2.97 | 2.32 | 1.72 | 1.86 | 1.78 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.48 | 0.42 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.26 | 0.31 | 0.30 | 0.26 | 0.23 | 0.24 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 2.08 | 2.08 | 2.65 | 4.73 | 84.52 | 2.00 | 1.59 | 1.69 | 1.12 | 1.09 | 1.04 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 5.92 | 3.76 | 2.80 | — | 2.57 | 1.72 | 2.26 | 3.34 | 2.75 | 3.16 |
| Interest Coverage | 4.56 | 4.56 | 1.36 | -0.72 | -6.09 | 4.10 | 8.69 | 8.22 | 6.46 | 6.16 | 2.42 |
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 | 1.32 | 1.32 | 1.23 | 1.20 | 1.29 | 1.39 | 1.45 | 1.36 | 1.21 | 1.47 | 1.34 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.84 | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.93 | 1.06 | 0.96 | 0.87 | 1.13 | 1.02 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.30 | 0.23 | 0.15 | 0.31 | 0.42 | 0.20 | 0.27 | 0.28 | 0.23 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.66 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.58 | 0.55 | 0.62 | 0.63 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.76 |
| Inventory Turnover | 3.41 | 3.41 | 3.20 | 3.07 | 2.63 | 2.90 | 3.14 | 3.32 | 3.58 | 4.08 | 4.10 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 72.25 | 74.37 | 85.40 | 95.27 | 91.23 | 87.64 | 106.84 | 84.24 | 86.30 | 83.81 |
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 | 1.4% | 1.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.0% | 1.8% | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.3% | 1.1% | 1.2% |
| Payout Ratio | 36.6% | 36.6% | — | — | — | 17.2% | 0.1% | 43.4% | 36.8% | 23.2% | 22.8% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 3.8% | 3.4% | — | — | — | 1.9% | 2.5% | 2.7% | 3.4% | 4.8% | 5.3% |
| FCF Yield | 3.8% | 3.4% | 5.7% | 9.1% | — | 4.5% | 4.5% | 3.9% | 2.9% | 2.9% | 3.8% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.9% | 3.3% | 1.4% | 6.0% | 0.7% | 3.6% | 3.3% | 1.9% | 2.2% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 1.4% | 1.3% | 1.9% | 3.4% | 4.4% | 7.7% | 0.7% | 4.8% | 4.5% | 3.0% | 3.4% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $963M | $933M | $949M | $952M | $950M | $958M | $973M | $997M | $1.0B | $990M |
Regulatory and litigation overhang
According to current market data, Philips trades at a forward P/E of 17.26, which, when compared to peers like Stryker or Edwards Lifesciences, suggests investors are pricing the company as a distressed turnaround play rather than a stable, high-growth medical technology leader within the broader healthcare sector.
The valuation discount relative to industry peers reflects significant market skepticism regarding the company's ability to restore historical margin profiles. Investors should monitor whether the current EV/EBITDA multiple of 10.96 provides a sufficient margin of safety given the persistent revenue contraction and the ongoing volatility in earnings quality.
Based on reported financial figures, the company's ROIC has struggled to exceed 2.4% in recent quarters, a stark decline from historical norms that indicates the firm is currently failing to generate returns on invested capital that exceed its cost of capital, thereby eroding long-term shareholder value.
The persistent inability to drive ROIC above low single digits suggests that the massive capital investments in R&D and manufacturing are not yet yielding the expected competitive advantages. This trend warrants further investigation into whether the current asset base is bloated or if the core business model requires a more fundamental restructuring to improve capital productivity.
As reported in recent filings, the cash conversion cycle has remained elevated, peaking at 145 days in 2024Q2, which highlights significant inefficiencies in inventory management and collection cycles compared to more agile peers in the medical device industry that maintain much tighter working capital control.
The high days inventory outstanding, which reached 131 days in 2025Q1, suggests that the company is carrying excessive stock, potentially due to supply chain bottlenecks or product demand mismatches. This inefficiency ties up critical liquidity and limits the firm's ability to pivot resources toward higher-growth informatics initiatives.
Based on reported figures, the debt-to-EBITDA ratio has shown extreme volatility, reaching as high as 36.19 in 2023Q4, which indicates that the company's ability to service its debt obligations is highly sensitive to non-recurring charges and operational disruptions that frequently impair its core earnings power.
While the interest coverage ratio has shown some recovery, the reliance on external financing to manage litigation-related cash outflows leaves the balance sheet vulnerable to further shocks. Investors should monitor whether management can deleverage effectively without sacrificing the R&D spending necessary to maintain the company's competitive moat.
The P/E ratio is frequently misapplied to this business model because it fails to account for the massive, non-recurring litigation and restructuring charges that currently distort net income, making the company appear more expensive or cheaper than its underlying operational cash flow generation would otherwise suggest.
Analysts should prioritize EV/EBITDA or free cash flow yield over P/E to better assess the company's true earning power, as these metrics are less susceptible to the accounting noise generated by the Respironics recall. Relying on P/E in this context risks ignoring the significant cash outflows that are currently suppressing the firm's intrinsic value.
Includes 30+ ratios · 30 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 PHG stock.
Koninklijke Philips N.V.'s current P/E ratio is 26.5x. The historical average is 30.9x. This places it at the 50th percentile of its historical range.
Koninklijke Philips N.V.'s current EV/EBITDA is 11.3x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 13.9x.
Koninklijke Philips N.V.'s return on equity (ROE) is 7.8%. The historical average is 9.5%.
Based on historical data, Koninklijke Philips N.V. is trading at a P/E of 26.5x. This is at the 50th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Koninklijke Philips N.V.'s current dividend yield is 1.38% with a payout ratio of 36.6%.
Koninklijke Philips N.V. has 45.2% gross margin and 8.0% operating margin.
Koninklijke Philips N.V.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 3.2x, indicating high leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.