Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio N/A · EV/EBITDA N/A · ROE N/A. (2021–2023 historical series)
Price-based multiples — how expensive the stock is relative to earnings, sales, book value, and cash flow
| Metric | TTM | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Cap | — | — | — | — |
| Enterprise Value | — | — | — | — |
| P/E Ratio → | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | — | — | — | — |
| P/B Ratio | — | — | — | — |
| 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 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV / Revenue | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDA | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBIT | — | — | — | — |
| 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 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 29.3% | 29.3% | 35.1% | 22.7% |
| Operating Margin | 35.7% | 35.7% | 14.4% | -18.8% |
| Net Profit Margin | 40.9% | 40.9% | 1.6% | -61.9% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | — | — | — | — |
| ROA | 25.7% | 25.7% | 0.9% | -15.2% |
| ROIC | 35.2% | 35.2% | 11.7% | -7.6% |
| ROCE | 1654.4% | 1654.4% | — | — |
Solvency and debt-coverage ratios — lower is generally safer
| Metric | TTM | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | — | — | — | — |
| Debt / EBITDA | 1.51 | 1.51 | 8.24 | — |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 1.37 | 1.37 | 7.82 | — |
| Debt / FCF | — | 17.87 | — | — |
| Interest Coverage | 3.19 | 3.19 | 0.77 | -0.41 |
Short-term solvency ratios and asset-utilisation metrics
| Metric | TTM | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.75 | 0.42 |
| Quick Ratio | 0.66 | 0.66 | 0.62 | 0.30 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.11 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.85 | 0.53 | 0.25 |
| Inventory Turnover | 3.90 | 3.90 | 2.47 | 1.59 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 190.22 | 419.45 | 264.34 |
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 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield | — | — | — | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback Yield | — | — | — | — |
| Total Shareholder Yield | — | — | — | — |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $0 | $0 | $0 |
SPAC-related accounting volatility
As reported in recent financial statements, the company's net margin of 40.85% significantly exceeds its 29.25% gross margin, suggesting that non-operating income from SPAC-related warrant revaluations is currently inflating bottom-line figures and masking the underlying profitability of the core industrial machinery and wet-chemical processing business.
The divergence between gross and net margins indicates that investors should prioritize operating margin analysis to gauge true earning power. Any sustained contraction in operating margins would suggest an inability to pass through rising German energy and labor costs to global customers.
According to recent SEC filings, the company's reliance on percentage-of-completion accounting for large-scale turnkey production lines creates inherent volatility in working capital, as the timing of cash collections often fails to align with the heavy upfront costs required for specialized electronics and PV equipment manufacturing.
This lumpy revenue recognition pattern makes it difficult to assess operational efficiency without granular data on DSO and DPO trends. Investors should monitor whether the company can maintain liquidity during extended project cycles without relying on external financing.
Following the recent business combination with Pegasus Digital Mobility Acquisition Corp, the company's leverage profile remains in a state of transition, as evidenced by the lack of historical balance sheet data available to assess long-term debt service comfort or the stability of the firm's asset base.
The presence of significant warrant liabilities introduces potential volatility into the balance sheet that does not reflect the operational health of the machinery business. Future assessments must distinguish between structural debt and these non-cash financial instruments to determine true solvency risk.
The most commonly misapplied metric for this business model is the standard P/E ratio, which is rendered meaningless by the non-recurring accounting gains associated with the recent de-SPAC transaction, as noted in recent corporate documentation regarding the company's transition to a public entity.
Analysts should instead focus on EBITDA excluding warrant adjustments and cash flow from operations to understand the true underlying performance. Relying on headline net income risks overestimating the company's ability to generate sustainable earnings from its core industrial operations.
Includes 30+ ratios · 3 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 SHMDW stock.
Based on historical data, SCHMID Group N.V. Warrants is trading at valuation metrics that vary. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
SCHMID Group N.V. Warrants has 29.3% gross margin and 35.7% operating margin. Operating margin above 20% indicates strong pricing power and cost efficiency.
SCHMID Group N.V. Warrants's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 1.5x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.