Acacia Research Corporation (ACTG) — Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio
Acacia Research Corporation (ACTG) has a Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of 0.02x as of March 2026, meaning its operating cash flow of $3.40 Million could theoretically repay 0% of its total liabilities ($188.65 Million) in one year. See Acacia Research Corporation free cash flow ratio to measure how efficiently the company converts operating cash flow to free cash.
CF-to-Debt Ratio
Operating Cash Flow
Total Liabilities
Data as of
Acacia Research Corporation Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio (1995–2025)
Historical debt coverage capacity for Acacia Research Corporation across 31 annual periods. Also explore ACTG year-over-year net asset growth to track the company's year-over-year net asset growth rate.
Annual Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio for Acacia Research Corporation (1995–2025)
Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Acacia Research Corporation. For market capitalisation and broader financial context, see ACTG stock market capitalisation.
| Year | CF-to-Debt Ratio | Operating CF (USD) | Total Liabilities | YoY Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 0.40x | $75.24 Million | $186.92 Million | ▲ +63.7% |
| 2024 | 0.25x | $50.12 Million | $203.78 Million | ▲ +148.0% |
| 2023 | -0.51x | $-22.51 Million | $43.94 Million | ▼ -193.1% |
| 2022 | -0.17x | $-37.34 Million | $213.61 Million | ▼ -583.2% |
| 2021 | 0.04x | $13.33 Million | $368.38 Million | ▲ +141.1% |
| 2020 | -0.09x | $-19.62 Million | $222.99 Million | ▼ -64.7% |
| 2019 | -0.05x | $-2.31 Million | $43.20 Million | ▼ -108.4% |
| 2018 | 0.64x | $20.88 Million | $32.71 Million | ▼ -65.8% |
| 2017 | 1.87x | $24.48 Million | $13.11 Million | ▲ +56.6% |
| 2016 | 1.19x | $34.06 Million | $28.56 Million | ▲ +504.5% |
| 2015 | -0.29x | $-9.95 Million | $33.75 Million | ▼ -433.3% |
| 2014 | 0.09x | $4.18 Million | $47.30 Million | ▲ +178.6% |
| 2013 | -0.11x | $-3.51 Million | $31.20 Million | ▼ -105.4% |
| 2012 | 2.09x | $104.95 Million | $50.24 Million | ▲ +8.7% |
| 2011 | 1.92x | $59.11 Million | $30.77 Million | ▼ -10.5% |
| 2010 | 2.15x | $44.92 Million | $20.93 Million | ▲ +196.8% |
| 2009 | 0.72x | $16.12 Million | $22.29 Million | ▲ +304.1% |
| 2008 | 0.18x | $2.60 Million | $14.53 Million | ▲ +142.7% |
| 2007 | -0.42x | $-2.62 Million | $6.25 Million | ▼ -128.2% |
| 2006 | 1.49x | $6.36 Million | $4.28 Million | ▲ +430.6% |
| 2005 | -0.45x | $-2.99 Million | $6.65 Million | ▲ +60.6% |
| 2004 | -1.14x | $-3.96 Million | $3.47 Million | ▼ -22.1% |
| 2003 | -0.93x | $-3.91 Million | $4.19 Million | ▼ -9.4% |
| 2002 | -0.85x | $-4.42 Million | $5.18 Million | ▼ -254.2% |
| 2001 | -0.24x | $-12.56 Million | $52.13 Million | ▲ +73.3% |
| 2000 | -0.90x | $-34.69 Million | $38.37 Million | ▲ +3.8% |
| 1999 | -0.94x | $-6.13 Million | $6.53 Million | ▲ +51.7% |
| 1998 | -1.95x | $-3.56 Million | $1.83 Million | ▲ +49.1% |
| 1997 | -3.83x | $-1.71 Million | $446.57K | ▼ -106.0% |
| 1996 | -1.86x | $-1.53 Million | $822.36K | ▼ -134.3% |
| 1995 | 5.42x | $1.94 Million | $357.98K | — |