Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio -6.5x · EV/EBITDA 3.8x · ROE -4.1%. (2006–2025 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 | $232M | $180M | $272M | $285M | $349M | $276M | $48M | $176M | $309M | $734M | $503M |
| Enterprise Value | $655M | $602M | $660M | $715M | $764M | $567M | $359M | $535M | $345M | $719M | $432M |
| P/E Ratio → | -6.53 | — | 4.00 | 2.70 | 2.51 | 76.00 | — | 6.00 | 33.87 | 463.33 | — |
| P/S Ratio | 0.76 | 0.59 | 0.74 | 0.79 | 1.00 | 1.41 | 0.43 | 0.90 | 2.57 | 11.00 | 16.30 |
| P/B Ratio | 0.27 | 0.22 | 0.32 | 0.36 | 0.53 | 0.92 | 0.16 | 0.34 | 0.67 | 2.06 | 1.73 |
| P/FCF | 4.39 | 3.40 | 7.15 | 6.64 | 5.30 | 14.18 | 1.70 | — | — | — | — |
| P/OCF | 1.54 | 1.19 | 1.40 | 1.44 | 1.77 | 3.80 | 0.67 | 1.65 | 4.39 | 17.15 | 44.84 |
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 | — | 1.96 | 1.80 | 1.98 | 2.20 | 2.89 | 3.18 | 2.74 | 2.88 | 10.78 | 14.00 |
| EV / EBITDA | 3.80 | 3.49 | 2.85 | 3.05 | 3.09 | 4.26 | — | 4.56 | 5.79 | 19.40 | — |
| EV / EBIT | 8.79 | 8.09 | 5.03 | 4.80 | 4.49 | 31.65 | — | 9.37 | 26.82 | 59.08 | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 11.38 | 17.32 | 16.64 | 11.62 | 29.07 | 12.69 | — | — | — | — |
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 | 60.7% | 60.7% | 44.7% | 48.9% | 63.3% | 57.3% | 24.6% | 41.4% | 39.7% | 40.6% | 25.9% |
| Operating Margin | 24.2% | 24.2% | 36.3% | 40.4% | 55.2% | 48.8% | -237.7% | 30.7% | 16.6% | 23.9% | -184.9% |
| Net Profit Margin | -11.3% | -11.3% | 18.4% | 29.0% | 39.9% | 1.7% | -224.2% | 15.1% | 7.5% | 2.6% | -122.0% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | -4.1% | -4.1% | 8.2% | 14.5% | 28.8% | 1.1% | -61.9% | 6.0% | 2.2% | 0.5% | -15.8% |
| ROA | -2.4% | -2.4% | 4.8% | 7.9% | 14.2% | 0.5% | -31.0% | 3.8% | 1.8% | 0.5% | -13.5% |
| ROIC | 4.5% | 4.5% | 8.1% | 9.5% | 17.2% | 12.0% | -27.1% | 6.5% | 3.6% | 4.3% | -19.1% |
| ROCE | 5.5% | 5.5% | 10.4% | 12.2% | 22.1% | 15.5% | -34.9% | 8.4% | 4.5% | 4.8% | -21.2% |
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 | 0.51 | 0.51 | 0.45 | 0.55 | 0.63 | 0.97 | 1.07 | 0.70 | 0.09 | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | 2.46 | 2.46 | 1.68 | 1.83 | 1.69 | 2.20 | — | 3.15 | 0.66 | — | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.51 | 0.45 | 0.55 | 0.63 | 0.97 | 1.06 | 0.69 | 0.08 | -0.04 | -0.24 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 2.45 | 2.45 | 1.67 | 1.83 | 1.68 | 2.18 | — | 3.06 | 0.61 | -0.41 | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | 7.98 | 10.17 | 10.00 | 6.32 | 14.89 | 10.99 | — | — | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 1.84 | 1.84 | 3.03 | 3.39 | 7.35 | 1.24 | -13.72 | 4.12 | 30.09 | — | -87.79 |
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 | 0.61 | 0.61 | 0.48 | 0.49 | 0.45 | 0.39 | 0.56 | 0.66 | 0.32 | 0.60 | 8.27 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.56 | 0.56 | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.38 | 0.39 | 0.56 | 100.35 | 0.32 | 0.60 | 8.27 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.17 | 0.06 | 0.31 | 7.81 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.20 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.27 | 0.29 | 0.17 | 0.20 | 0.21 | 0.16 | 0.10 |
| Inventory Turnover | 22.72 | 22.72 | 50.00 | 30.09 | 13.77 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 38.69 | 37.12 | 41.84 | 45.65 | 49.20 | 54.33 | 46.11 | 40.19 | 76.00 | 46.23 |
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 | — | — | 25.0% | 37.0% | 39.8% | 1.3% | — | 16.7% | 3.0% | 0.2% | — |
| FCF Yield | 22.8% | 29.4% | 14.0% | 15.1% | 18.9% | 7.1% | 58.9% | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $207M | $200M | $195M | $142M | $121M | $73M | $67M | $61M | $53M | $39M |
Liquidity and solvency risk
According to current market data, Ring Energy trades at a forward P/E of 4.11 and a P/B of 0.26, suggesting that investors are heavily discounting the company's asset base due to persistent operational losses and the extreme scarcity of liquid cash reserves on the balance sheet.
The low P/B multiple indicates that the market assigns little value to the company's book equity, likely anticipating further asset impairments or a dilution event to address liquidity needs. While the forward P/E appears attractive, it relies on optimistic earnings projections that may not materialize given the company's history of negative net margins and high capital intensity.
Based on reported financial figures, Ring Energy's ROIC has trended into negative territory, reaching -9.2% in 2026Q1, which signals that the company is currently failing to generate returns that exceed its cost of capital while managing its mature conventional Permian Basin asset portfolio.
The deterioration in ROIC from positive levels in 2024 suggests that the company's recent acquisition-led growth strategy has not yet translated into sustainable value creation. Investors should monitor whether management can improve operational efficiency or if the current asset base is structurally incapable of delivering competitive returns in the prevailing commodity price environment.
As indicated by recent quarterly filings, Ring Energy's cash conversion cycle has exhibited extreme volatility, with DIO reaching 4,728 days in 2026Q1, reflecting significant challenges in managing inventory and receivables within the company's capital-intensive oil and gas production operations.
The erratic nature of these efficiency metrics suggests that the company's internal processes for managing working capital are struggling to adapt to declining production volumes. This lack of operational consistency may further strain the company's already limited liquidity, as cash remains tied up in inefficient cycles rather than supporting debt service or reinvestment.
Based on the most recent quarterly data, Ring Energy's current ratio of 0.40 highlights a precarious liquidity position, as the company holds less than $1 million in cash, leaving it highly dependent on external credit facilities to meet its immediate operational and financial obligations.
This liquidity profile appears inadequate for an E&P company facing commodity price volatility and high fixed-cost burdens. The reliance on revolving credit suggests that any disruption in access to capital markets or a tightening of lending covenants could pose a severe threat to the company's ongoing viability.
While the reported debt-to-equity ratio of 0.51% might appear healthy compared to industry peers, this metric is fundamentally misleading for Ring Energy because it obscures the company's inability to generate sufficient internal cash flow to cover its substantial debt service requirements.
Investors should prioritize interest coverage ratios and free cash flow yield over simple leverage metrics, as the latter fails to capture the operational fragility inherent in the company's business model. Relying on D/E ratios in this context ignores the reality that the company's equity base is being eroded by persistent losses, which artificially improves the leverage ratio while masking true solvency risks.
Includes 30+ ratios · 20 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 REI stock.
Ring Energy, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is -6.5x. The historical average is 22.4x.
Ring Energy, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 3.8x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 13.5x.
Ring Energy, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is -4.1%. The historical average is -5.3%.
Based on historical data, Ring Energy, Inc. is trading at a P/E of -6.5x. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Ring Energy, Inc. has 60.7% gross margin and 24.2% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
Ring Energy, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 2.5x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.