Cross Timbers Royalty Trust (CRT) — Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio
Cross Timbers Royalty Trust (CRT) has a Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of 1.97x as of December 2025, meaning its operating cash flow of $4.22 Million could theoretically repay 2% of its total liabilities ($2.14 Million) in one year. See how much free cash does Cross Timbers Royalty Trust generate 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
Cross Timbers Royalty Trust Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio (1992–2025)
Historical debt coverage capacity for Cross Timbers Royalty Trust across 33 annual periods. Also explore CRT net asset momentum to track the company's year-over-year net asset growth rate.
Annual Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio for Cross Timbers Royalty Trust (1992–2025)
Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Cross Timbers Royalty Trust. For market capitalisation and broader financial context, see CRT market cap.
| Year | CF-to-Debt Ratio | Operating CF (USD) | Total Liabilities | YoY Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 1.97x | $4.22 Million | $2.14 Million | ▼ -50.2% |
| 2024 | 3.96x | $5.44 Million | $1.37 Million | ▼ -99.9% |
| 2023 | 6726.53x | $12.49 Billion | $1.86 Million | ▲ +108847.1% |
| 2022 | 6.17x | $11.74 Million | $1.90 Million | ▲ +32.2% |
| 2021 | 4.67x | $8.51 Million | $1.82 Million | ▲ +101.8% |
| 2020 | -265.67x | $-364.72 Million | $1.37 Million | ▼ -8262.0% |
| 2019 | 3.25x | $4.89 Million | $1.50 Million | ▼ -32.9% |
| 2018 | 4.85x | $7.77 Million | $1.60 Million | ▲ +30.6% |
| 2017 | 3.71x | $5.46 Million | $1.47 Million | ▲ +0.1% |
| 2016 | 3.71x | $5.73 Million | $1.54 Million | ▼ -53.2% |
| 2015 | 7.92x | $7.68 Million | $969.70K | ▼ -33.2% |
| 2014 | 11.85x | $15.15 Million | $1.28 Million | ▲ +3.0% |
| 2013 | 11.50x | $13.15 Million | $1.14 Million | ▲ +7.4% |
| 2012 | 10.71x | $14.01 Million | $1.31 Million | ▼ -22.9% |
| 2011 | 13.89x | $16.85 Million | $1.21 Million | ▲ +30.4% |
| 2010 | 10.65x | $15.06 Million | $1.41 Million | ▲ +11.0% |
| 2009 | 9.60x | $10.25 Million | $1.07 Million | ▼ -51.2% |
| 2008 | 19.67x | $29.81 Million | $1.52 Million | ▲ +87.0% |
| 2007 | 10.52x | $18.51 Million | $1.76 Million | ▲ +9.5% |
| 2005 | 9.61x | $20.31 Million | $2.11 Million | ▼ -7.1% |
| 2004 | 10.34x | $14.85 Million | $1.44 Million | ▲ +189.3% |
| 2003 | -11.57x | $-11.51 Million | $994.75K | ▼ -256.9% |
| 2002 | 7.38x | $9.22 Million | $1.25 Million | ▲ +143.9% |
| 2001 | -16.80x | $-14.33 Million | $852.83K | ▼ -251.8% |
| 2000 | 11.07x | $11.64 Million | $1.05 Million | ▲ +45.9% |
| 1999 | 7.59x | $6.93 Million | $914.00K | ▼ -40.9% |
| 1998 | 12.83x | $6.79 Million | $529.54K | ▼ -12.2% |
| 1997 | 14.61x | $9.69 Million | $663.55K | ▲ +127.2% |
| 1996 | 6.43x | $9.00 Million | $1.40 Million | ▼ -50.5% |
| 1995 | 13.00x | $5.20 Million | $400.00K | ▲ +64.8% |
| 1994 | 7.89x | $7.10 Million | $900.00K | ▼ -48.8% |
| 1993 | 15.40x | $7.70 Million | $500.00K | ▲ +47.7% |
| 1992 | 10.43x | $7.30 Million | $700.00K | — |