Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri AS (TKC) — Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio
Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri AS (TKC) has a Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of 0.00x as of September 2025, meaning its operating cash flow of $784.01 Million could theoretically repay 0% of its total liabilities ($248.39 Billion) in one year. Explore Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri AS long-term investment intensity to see how much of total assets are deployed in long-term investments.
CF-to-Debt Ratio
Operating Cash Flow
Total Liabilities
Data as of
Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri AS Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio (1999–2024)
Historical debt coverage capacity for Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri AS across 26 annual periods. Also explore TKC total asset value for the complete picture of this company's asset base.
Annual Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio for Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri AS (1999–2024)
Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri AS. For market capitalisation and broader financial context, see Turkcell Iletisim Hizmetleri AS (TKC) market capitalisation.
| Year | CF-to-Debt Ratio | Operating CF (USD) | Total Liabilities | YoY Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 0.48x | $75.01 Billion | $157.31 Billion | ▲ +42.7% |
| 2023 | 0.33x | $60.24 Billion | $180.25 Billion | ▲ +66.9% |
| 2022 | 0.20x | $25.15 Billion | $125.61 Billion | ▼ -13.7% |
| 2021 | 0.23x | $19.95 Billion | $85.93 Billion | ▼ -92.4% |
| 2020 | 3.04x | $13.09 Billion | $4.31 Billion | ▲ +56.1% |
| 2019 | 1.94x | $9.03 Billion | $4.64 Billion | ▲ +790.7% |
| 2018 | 0.22x | $5.83 Billion | $26.71 Billion | ▲ +33.3% |
| 2017 | 0.16x | $3.10 Billion | $18.94 Billion | ▲ +318.9% |
| 2016 | 0.04x | $607.14 Million | $15.53 Billion | ▼ -75.8% |
| 2015 | 0.16x | $1.90 Billion | $11.79 Billion | ▼ -39.4% |
| 2014 | 0.27x | $1.87 Billion | $7.01 Billion | ▼ -17.8% |
| 2013 | 0.32x | $2.11 Billion | $6.52 Billion | ▼ -9.4% |
| 2012 | 0.36x | $2.13 Billion | $5.95 Billion | ▲ +30.0% |
| 2011 | 0.27x | $1.75 Billion | $6.35 Billion | ▼ -23.6% |
| 2010 | 0.36x | $2.00 Billion | $5.54 Billion | ▼ -4.8% |
| 2009 | 0.38x | $1.94 Billion | $5.13 Billion | ▼ -40.7% |
| 2008 | 0.64x | $2.57 Billion | $4.03 Billion | ▼ -24.9% |
| 2007 | 0.85x | $2.52 Billion | $2.97 Billion | ▼ -9.7% |
| 2006 | 0.94x | $2.62 Billion | $2.78 Billion | ▲ +33.8% |
| 2005 | 0.70x | $1.54 Billion | $2.19 Billion | ▲ +169.2% |
| 2004 | 0.26x | $805.93 Million | $3.09 Billion | ▼ -41.8% |
| 2003 | 0.45x | $1.39 Billion | $3.09 Billion | ▲ +40.3% |
| 2002 | 0.32x | $812.50 Million | $2.54 Billion | ▲ +149.4% |
| 2001 | 0.13x | $385.27 Million | $3.00 Billion | ▼ -4.4% |
| 2000 | 0.13x | $463.91 Million | $3.46 Billion | ▼ -29.9% |
| 1999 | 0.19x | $517.75 Million | $2.71 Billion | — |