Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 12.5x · EV/EBITDA 7.5x · ROE 26.0%. (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 | $156M | $193M | $236M | $209M | $108M | $246M | $49M | $31M | $38M | $34M | $26M |
| Enterprise Value | $149M | $185M | $233M | $206M | $107M | $237M | $48M | $35M | $40M | $34M | $27M |
| P/E Ratio → | 12.47 | 15.40 | 30.66 | 263.33 | 136.67 | 32.41 | 18.53 | 15.79 | 22.46 | 12.71 | 9.33 |
| P/S Ratio | 1.67 | 2.06 | 3.00 | 3.51 | 2.15 | 4.86 | 1.12 | 0.66 | 0.94 | 0.82 | 0.66 |
| P/B Ratio | 2.88 | 3.55 | 5.65 | 6.12 | 3.26 | 7.75 | 2.07 | 1.48 | 2.00 | 1.99 | 1.86 |
| P/FCF | 31.48 | 38.84 | — | 76.79 | — | 65.42 | 10.09 | — | — | 184.98 | 105.85 |
| P/OCF | 10.92 | 13.48 | 45.72 | 27.03 | — | 26.95 | 6.55 | 7.85 | 4.46 | 11.70 | 6.62 |
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 | — | 1.98 | 2.97 | 3.45 | 2.14 | 4.68 | 1.10 | 0.75 | 1.00 | 0.82 | 0.67 |
| EV / EBITDA | 7.49 | 9.33 | 18.58 | 58.82 | 28.68 | 26.79 | 7.81 | 8.04 | 11.64 | 7.40 | 5.21 |
| EV / EBIT | 8.76 | 10.89 | 23.23 | 130.31 | 89.15 | 25.50 | 12.82 | 13.04 | 18.20 | 9.25 | 6.20 |
| EV / FCF | — | 37.36 | — | 75.54 | — | 62.99 | 9.91 | — | — | 185.76 | 107.50 |
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 | 27.9% | 27.9% | 25.5% | 17.9% | 18.9% | 28.5% | 25.2% | 21.4% | 26.1% | 27.8% | 25.8% |
| Operating Margin | 18.2% | 18.2% | 12.6% | 1.9% | 1.7% | 12.2% | 8.6% | 5.5% | 5.5% | 8.9% | 10.8% |
| Net Profit Margin | 13.4% | 13.4% | 9.8% | 1.3% | 1.6% | 14.9% | 6.1% | 4.2% | 4.2% | 6.4% | 7.1% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 26.0% | 26.0% | 20.2% | 2.4% | 2.5% | 27.3% | 12.0% | 9.8% | 9.4% | 17.1% | 22.1% |
| ROA | 16.1% | 16.1% | 11.9% | 1.4% | 1.5% | 15.2% | 5.9% | 4.5% | 4.8% | 10.1% | 13.2% |
| ROIC | 29.5% | 29.5% | 21.2% | 2.6% | 2.3% | 20.4% | 11.8% | 8.3% | 8.6% | 17.4% | 24.3% |
| ROCE | 26.9% | 26.9% | 20.1% | 2.5% | 2.1% | 16.0% | 10.4% | 7.9% | 8.7% | 18.4% | 26.0% |
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 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.20 | 0.14 | 0.34 | 0.26 | 0.24 | 0.21 | 0.28 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 0.23 | 0.23 | 0.41 | 1.65 | 1.73 | 0.49 | 1.28 | 1.24 | 1.30 | 0.76 | 0.76 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | -0.14 | -0.06 | -0.10 | -0.01 | -0.29 | -0.04 | 0.19 | 0.14 | 0.01 | 0.03 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | -0.37 | -0.37 | -0.19 | -0.97 | -0.07 | -1.03 | -0.14 | 0.93 | 0.74 | 0.03 | 0.08 |
| Debt / FCF | — | -1.48 | — | -1.25 | — | -2.43 | -0.17 | — | — | 0.77 | 1.64 |
| Interest Coverage | 75.67 | 75.67 | 43.50 | 6.19 | 4.63 | 48.86 | 17.32 | 14.96 | 12.59 | 20.19 | 26.68 |
Net cash position: cash ($12M) exceeds total debt ($5M)
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 | 3.40 | 3.40 | 2.39 | 2.08 | 2.58 | 2.00 | 2.62 | 1.98 | 1.84 | 2.43 | 3.14 |
| Quick Ratio | 2.92 | 2.92 | 1.94 | 1.76 | 2.24 | 1.79 | 2.38 | 1.75 | 1.54 | 1.98 | 2.63 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.83 | 0.83 | 0.50 | 0.57 | 0.60 | 0.97 | 1.12 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.57 | 0.90 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 1.07 | 1.15 | 0.97 | 0.92 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 1.05 | 0.97 | 1.43 | 1.67 |
| Inventory Turnover | 9.73 | 9.73 | 8.76 | 9.50 | 10.65 | 12.73 | 14.96 | 16.38 | 8.35 | 8.57 | 11.52 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 110.93 | 96.56 | 108.64 | 128.80 | 78.29 | 87.71 | 105.26 | 131.62 | 92.54 | 67.98 |
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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.6% | 0.9% | 0.7% | 0.1% | — |
| Payout Ratio | — | — | — | — | — | — | 10.6% | 14.4% | 15.2% | 1.8% | — |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings Yield | 8.0% | 6.5% | 3.3% | 0.4% | 0.7% | 3.1% | 5.4% | 6.3% | 4.5% | 7.9% | 10.7% |
| FCF Yield | 3.2% | 2.6% | — | 1.3% | — | 1.5% | 9.9% | — | — | 0.5% | 0.9% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.9% | 0.7% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $5M | $5M | $5M | $5M | $5M | $5M | $5M | $5M | $5M | $5M |
Project-based revenue volatility
Based on current market data, Smith-Midland trades at a trailing P/E of 12.27 and an EV/EBITDA of 7.36, suggesting that investors are applying a discount to the firm's earnings potential compared to broader industrial peers, likely due to the inherent lumpiness of its project-based revenue streams.
The current PEG ratio of 0.34 implies that the market may be significantly underestimating the company's growth trajectory or failing to assign a premium to its proprietary licensing model. This valuation gap warrants further investigation into whether the market is misclassifying the firm as a pure-play commodity manufacturer rather than an IP-driven infrastructure provider.
As reported in recent financial statements, Smith-Midland's ROIC has fluctuated between 1.3% and 9.4% over the last ten quarters, indicating that the company's ability to compound returns on invested capital is heavily tethered to the timing of large-scale infrastructure project completions and associated manufacturing capacity utilization.
The volatility in ROIC suggests that the firm's capital-intensive manufacturing base periodically drags down overall returns during periods of lower project throughput. Investors should monitor whether management can shift the revenue mix toward higher-margin licensing to improve these returns without requiring further heavy investment in fixed assets.
According to quarterly data, the company's cash conversion cycle has oscillated between 78 and 136 days, reflecting the operational challenges of managing long-duration construction contracts and the inherent delays in collecting receivables from state-level infrastructure clients within the Mid-Atlantic region.
The elevated DSO, which reached 125 days in 2025Q3, suggests that the company's working capital efficiency is highly sensitive to the payment terms of public sector contracts. This variability in cash collection cycles appears to be a structural feature of the business model that necessitates the maintenance of a robust liquidity buffer.
Based on the latest reported figures, Smith-Midland maintains a negligible debt-to-equity ratio of 0.08%, which provides the firm with an exceptionally strong financial position that effectively eliminates near-term refinancing risk and offers significant flexibility to navigate the cyclical downturns typical of the construction materials industry.
This conservative capital structure appears to be a deliberate strategic choice, allowing the company to avoid interest rate sensitivity that currently plagues more leveraged peers. While this approach protects the balance sheet, it may also indicate an underutilization of debt capacity that could otherwise be deployed to accelerate growth or enhance shareholder returns.
The P/E ratio is frequently misapplied to Smith-Midland because it fails to distinguish between the firm's low-margin, capital-intensive manufacturing operations and its high-margin, capital-light licensing business, which functions more like a recurring software annuity than a traditional construction materials revenue stream.
Investors should instead focus on a sum-of-the-parts valuation or an adjusted EV/EBITDA that accounts for the differing risk profiles of these two segments. Relying solely on a consolidated P/E ratio obscures the true earning power of the proprietary IP and may lead to an inaccurate assessment of the company's long-term value proposition.
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 SMID stock.
Smith-Midland Corporation's current P/E ratio is 12.5x. The historical average is 21.0x. This places it at the 45th percentile of its historical range.
Smith-Midland Corporation's current EV/EBITDA is 7.5x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 12.3x.
Smith-Midland Corporation's return on equity (ROE) is 26.0%. This is above the typical threshold of 15-20% considered good for most companies. The historical average is 9.7%.
Based on historical data, Smith-Midland Corporation is trading at a P/E of 12.5x. This is at the 45th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
Smith-Midland Corporation has 27.9% gross margin and 18.2% operating margin. Operating margin between 10-20% is typical for established companies.
Smith-Midland Corporation's Debt/EBITDA ratio is 0.2x, indicating low leverage. A ratio below 2x is generally considered financially healthy.