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 June 2026, meaning its operating cash flow of $3.90 Million could theoretically repay 0% of its total liabilities ($234.51 Million) in one year. See Acacia Research Corporation leverage flexibility ratio to measure the company's free cash flow as a share of total liabilities.
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. For the full cash flow conversion analysis, see cash flow conversion of Acacia Research Corporation.
Annual Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio for Acacia Research Corporation (1995–2025)
Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Acacia Research Corporation. Check cash flow quality index of Acacia Research Corporation to evaluate the quality of earnings relative to operating cash generation.
| 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 | — |