Latest Ratios: P/E Ratio 417.1x · EV/EBITDA 15.2x · ROE 1.1%. (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 | $1.3B | $1.3B | $473M | $593M | $449M | $360M | $108M | $246M | $208M | $489M | $438M |
| Enterprise Value | $1.5B | $1.5B | $658M | $738M | $630M | $519M | $287M | $485M | $1.0B | $1.2B | $1.1B |
| P/E Ratio → | 417.12 | 422.07 | 4.37 | 23.00 | 57.28 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| P/S Ratio | 1.99 | 2.01 | 0.79 | 0.95 | 0.81 | 0.93 | 0.29 | 0.44 | 0.21 | 0.68 | 0.63 |
| P/B Ratio | 4.43 | 4.48 | 1.87 | 4.03 | 4.22 | 3.65 | 1.53 | 1.51 | 0.67 | 1.39 | 1.09 |
| P/FCF | 64.12 | 64.81 | — | 18.51 | — | — | 2.28 | — | — | 38.58 | 13.31 |
| P/OCF | 12.48 | 12.62 | 12.96 | 8.45 | 23.69 | 77.21 | 1.41 | 2.73 | 4.48 | 7.57 | 8.12 |
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 | — | 2.35 | 1.10 | 1.18 | 1.14 | 1.34 | 0.76 | 0.86 | 1.01 | 1.60 | 1.59 |
| EV / EBITDA | 15.22 | 15.36 | 7.67 | 9.23 | 11.32 | 25.56 | 9.74 | 9.02 | 6.79 | 10.53 | 13.25 |
| EV / EBIT | 24.70 | 33.87 | 12.84 | 13.65 | 23.32 | 313.69 | — | — | 28.37 | 82.51 | — |
| EV / FCF | — | 75.98 | — | 23.01 | — | — | 6.05 | — | — | 91.05 | 33.50 |
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 | 25.4% | 25.4% | 23.4% | 22.6% | 20.5% | 15.4% | 18.0% | 18.3% | 16.6% | 16.7% | 10.0% |
| Operating Margin | 9.4% | 9.4% | 8.3% | 7.3% | 4.1% | -3.4% | -2.3% | 1.1% | 3.4% | 0.8% | -6.7% |
| Net Profit Margin | 0.5% | 0.5% | 18.1% | 4.1% | 1.4% | -4.3% | -13.5% | -24.9% | -2.8% | -5.4% | -23.2% |
| Metric | TTM | FY 2025 | FY 2024 | FY 2023 | FY 2022 | FY 2021 | FY 2020 | FY 2019 | FY 2018 | FY 2017 | FY 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE | 1.1% | 1.1% | 54.1% | 20.3% | 7.6% | -19.8% | -43.7% | -58.8% | -8.3% | -10.4% | -35.3% |
| ROA | 0.4% | 0.4% | 17.8% | 5.4% | 1.8% | -2.2% | -4.3% | -10.5% | -2.0% | -3.0% | -10.9% |
| ROIC | 9.5% | 9.5% | 10.3% | 11.8% | 6.3% | -3.9% | -2.0% | 0.6% | 2.4% | 0.4% | -2.9% |
| ROCE | 9.7% | 9.7% | 10.3% | 12.9% | 7.2% | -4.1% | -1.2% | 0.5% | 2.9% | 0.5% | -3.5% |
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 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.87 | 1.34 | 1.82 | 1.94 | 3.47 | 1.56 | 2.69 | 1.96 | 1.75 |
| Debt / EBITDA | 2.72 | 2.72 | 2.58 | 2.46 | 3.49 | 9.42 | 8.35 | 4.73 | 5.66 | 6.31 | 8.42 |
| Net Debt / Equity | — | 0.77 | 0.73 | 0.98 | 1.70 | 1.62 | 2.52 | 1.46 | 2.57 | 1.89 | 1.66 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA | 2.26 | 2.26 | 2.15 | 1.81 | 3.25 | 7.87 | 6.07 | 4.44 | 5.39 | 6.07 | 7.98 |
| Debt / FCF | — | 11.16 | — | 4.50 | — | — | 3.77 | — | — | 52.47 | 20.18 |
| Interest Coverage | 2.53 | 2.53 | 2.28 | 2.42 | 1.71 | 0.10 | -0.33 | -5.03 | 0.49 | 0.24 | -2.95 |
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 | 2.02 | 2.02 | 2.19 | 2.24 | 1.92 | 2.17 | 1.17 | 1.86 | 2.00 | 1.96 | 2.36 |
| Quick Ratio | 2.02 | 2.02 | 1.36 | 1.47 | 1.34 | 1.45 | 1.07 | 1.44 | 1.28 | 1.29 | 1.45 |
| Cash Ratio | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.30 | 0.42 | 0.11 | 0.32 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.20 | 0.15 | 0.31 |
| Asset Turnover | — | 0.80 | 0.83 | 1.25 | 1.21 | 0.97 | 0.33 | 0.44 | 0.72 | 0.55 | 0.53 |
| Inventory Turnover | — | — | 4.51 | 5.02 | 6.10 | 4.75 | 4.04 | 5.70 | 5.80 | 5.22 | 5.87 |
| Days Sales Outstanding | — | 3.35 | 63.86 | 65.16 | 85.53 | 85.74 | 61.92 | 72.31 | 71.31 | 72.71 | 60.04 |
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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1.1% | 0.5% | 9.2% | 3.9% | 6.6% |
| 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 | 0.2% | 0.2% | 22.9% | 4.3% | 1.7% | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| FCF Yield | 1.6% | 1.5% | — | 5.4% | — | — | 43.8% | — | — | 2.6% | 7.5% |
| Buyback Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 11.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Total Shareholder Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.1% | 11.9% | 9.2% | 3.9% | 6.6% |
| Shares Outstanding | — | $135M | $132M | $131M | $130M | $127M | $126M | $126M | $124M | $114M | $87M |
Mineral development execution risk
Based on current market data, TTI trades at a forward P/E of 40.86, suggesting that investors are pricing in significant future growth from the company's mineral extraction initiatives rather than relying on the historical, low-margin performance of its core oilfield service and completion fluid segments.
The elevated P/E ratio relative to the broader energy services sector indicates that the market is assigning a premium to the potential of the Arkansas brine assets. However, this valuation appears precarious given the company's historical inability to maintain consistent earnings, warranting caution until the mineral development projects demonstrate clear, scalable profitability.
As reported in financial statements, TTI's ROIC has struggled to exceed 5% over the last ten quarters, peaking at 4.9% in 2024Q2, which indicates that the company has yet to achieve a return on invested capital that consistently exceeds its likely cost of capital.
The persistent low ROIC suggests that the company's capital-intensive investments in water management and brine infrastructure have not yet generated the expected efficiency gains. Investors should monitor whether the transition to lithium and bromine production can drive a structural improvement in capital returns or if the business remains trapped in a low-return service cycle.
According to quarterly data, TTI's cash conversion cycle has remained highly erratic, fluctuating between 36 and 121 days over the past ten quarters, reflecting the inherent operational challenges of managing inventory and receivables across both seasonal chemical sales and transactional water management service contracts.
The wide variance in the cash conversion cycle suggests that TTI lacks tight control over its working capital, which may be exacerbated by the lumpy nature of offshore project cycles. This inefficiency appears to be a structural drag on cash flow, as the company frequently ties up significant capital in inventory and outstanding receivables.
Based on reported figures, TTI has successfully reduced its debt-to-equity ratio from 1.47 in 2024Q1 to 0.79 in 2026Q1, demonstrating a disciplined approach to balance sheet management that provides a necessary buffer against the inherent volatility of the oil and gas services industry.
The improved leverage profile suggests that management is prioritizing financial flexibility to fund its strategic pivot toward mineral extraction. While the interest coverage ratio remains sensitive to quarterly earnings swings, the overall reduction in debt levels appears to mitigate the risk of insolvency during cyclical downturns in the energy sector.
The P/E ratio is frequently misapplied to TTI because it fails to account for the company's transition from a service-based model to a resource-development firm, where non-cash charges and heavy capital expenditure often distort reported net income and mask the underlying value of its mineral assets.
Analysts should instead focus on EV/EBITDA or asset-based valuation metrics to better capture the potential of the Arkansas brine acreage. Relying on P/E multiples in this context likely leads to an inaccurate assessment of the company's earning power, as it ignores the significant investment phase currently underway.
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 TTI stock.
TETRA Technologies, Inc.'s current P/E ratio is 417.1x. The historical average is 34.6x. This places it at the 100th percentile of its historical range.
TETRA Technologies, Inc.'s current EV/EBITDA is 15.2x. This enterprise value multiple compares the company's total value (equity + debt - cash) to its EBITDA. The historical average is 10.1x.
TETRA Technologies, Inc.'s return on equity (ROE) is 1.1%. The historical average is -0.5%.
Based on historical data, TETRA Technologies, Inc. is trading at a P/E of 417.1x. This is at the 100th percentile of its historical P/E range. Compare with industry peers and growth rates for a complete picture.
TETRA Technologies, Inc. has 25.4% gross margin and 9.4% operating margin.
TETRA Technologies, Inc.'s Debt/EBITDA ratio is 2.7x, indicating moderate leverage. A ratio between 2-4x is manageable but warrants monitoring.