Universal Display (OLED) — Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio
Universal Display (OLED) has a Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of 0.57x as of March 2026, meaning its operating cash flow of $108.88 Million could theoretically repay 1% of its total liabilities ($190.74 Million) in one year. See Universal Display free cash flow efficiency 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
Universal Display Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio (1995–2025)
Historical debt coverage capacity for Universal Display across 31 annual periods. Also explore OLED net asset momentum to track the company's year-over-year net asset growth rate.
Annual Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio for Universal Display (1995–2025)
Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Universal Display. For market capitalisation and broader financial context, see Universal Display market cap and net worth.
| Year | CF-to-Debt Ratio | Operating CF (USD) | Total Liabilities | YoY Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 1.00x | $210.83 Million | $211.84 Million | ▼ -15.4% |
| 2024 | 1.18x | $253.74 Million | $215.81 Million | ▲ +68.4% |
| 2023 | 0.70x | $154.78 Million | $221.74 Million | ▲ +41.7% |
| 2022 | 0.49x | $126.81 Million | $257.45 Million | ▼ -5.4% |
| 2021 | 0.52x | $191.10 Million | $367.00 Million | ▲ +24.8% |
| 2020 | 0.42x | $148.79 Million | $356.51 Million | ▼ -33.6% |
| 2019 | 0.63x | $193.91 Million | $308.71 Million | ▲ +25.3% |
| 2018 | 0.50x | $121.80 Million | $242.92 Million | ▼ -54.5% |
| 2017 | 1.10x | $133.37 Million | $120.90 Million | ▲ +36.1% |
| 2016 | 0.81x | $80.34 Million | $99.09 Million | ▼ -33.9% |
| 2015 | 1.23x | $113.61 Million | $92.65 Million | ▲ +6.6% |
| 2014 | 1.15x | $47.27 Million | $41.10 Million | ▼ -10.4% |
| 2013 | 1.28x | $44.99 Million | $35.07 Million | ▲ +155.0% |
| 2012 | 0.50x | $17.75 Million | $35.29 Million | ▼ -3.0% |
| 2011 | 0.52x | $16.41 Million | $31.65 Million | ▲ +530.8% |
| 2010 | -0.12x | $-4.20 Million | $34.90 Million | ▲ +83.1% |
| 2009 | -0.71x | $-14.61 Million | $20.51 Million | ▼ -78.5% |
| 2008 | -0.40x | $-7.79 Million | $19.51 Million | ▲ +43.3% |
| 2007 | -0.70x | $-11.10 Million | $15.78 Million | ▼ -168.3% |
| 2006 | -0.26x | $-4.70 Million | $17.95 Million | ▼ -1130.6% |
| 2005 | -0.02x | $-345.06K | $16.20 Million | ▲ +95.5% |
| 2004 | -0.47x | $-6.97 Million | $14.70 Million | ▲ +40.4% |
| 2003 | -0.79x | $-5.80 Million | $7.29 Million | ▲ +0.4% |
| 2002 | -0.80x | $-4.76 Million | $5.97 Million | ▼ -8.5% |
| 2001 | -0.74x | $-7.70 Million | $10.47 Million | ▲ +74.5% |
| 2000 | -2.88x | $-6.49 Million | $2.25 Million | ▲ +40.3% |
| 1999 | -4.83x | $-4.30 Million | $890.38K | ▼ -9.7% |
| 1998 | -4.40x | $-2.20 Million | $500.00K | ▲ +45.0% |
| 1997 | -8.00x | $-2.40 Million | $300.00K | ▲ +66.7% |
| 1996 | -24.00x | $-2.40 Million | $100.00K | ▼ -657.9% |
| 1995 | -3.17x | $-1.90 Million | $600.00K | — |