Tri Continental Closed Fund Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio
Tri Continental Closed Fund cash flow-to-debt ratio. Tri Continental Closed Fund (TY) has a Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of -14.03x as of June 2022, meaning its operating cash flow of $-316.86 Million could theoretically repay -14% of its total liabilities ($22.58 Million) in one year. Check TY operating cash flow to net income to evaluate the quality of earnings relative to operating cash generation.
CF-to-Debt Ratio
Operating Cash Flow
Total Liabilities
Data as of
Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio of Tri Continental Closed Fund (1996–2021)
Cash flow-to-debt ratio of Tri Continental Closed Fund from 1996 to 2021. Historical debt coverage capacity for Tri Continental Closed Fund across 26 annual periods. Check Tri Continental Closed Fund (TY) total reinvestment rate to assess the company's total reinvestment commitment from operating cash flow.
Tri Continental Closed Fund Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio by Year (1996–2021)
Tri Continental Closed Fund cash flow-to-debt ratio by year from 1996 to 2021. Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Tri Continental Closed Fund. For the full cash flow conversion analysis, see cash flow conversion of Tri Continental Closed Fund.
| Year | CF-to-Debt Ratio | Operating CF (USD) | Total Liabilities | YoY Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 139.97x | $435.70 Million | $3.11 Million | ▲ +41.6% |
| 2020 | 98.84x | $197.96 Million | $2.00 Million | ▼ -36.7% |
| 2019 | 156.17x | $341.30 Million | $2.19 Million | ▲ +1211.9% |
| 2018 | -14.05x | $-73.45 Million | $5.23 Million | ▼ -111.1% |
| 2017 | 126.32x | $280.96 Million | $2.22 Million | ▲ +886.8% |
| 2016 | 12.80x | $185.42 Million | $14.49 Million | ▲ +303.2% |
| 2015 | -6.30x | $-32.23 Million | $5.12 Million | ▼ -136.1% |
| 2014 | 17.43x | $146.04 Million | $8.38 Million | ▼ -67.9% |
| 2013 | 54.29x | $313.40 Million | $5.77 Million | ▲ +61.5% |
| 2012 | 33.61x | $164.70 Million | $4.90 Million | ▲ +4784.6% |
| 2011 | 0.69x | $68.40 Million | $99.40 Million | ▼ -65.0% |
| 2010 | 1.96x | $162.70 Million | $82.80 Million | ▲ +123.2% |
| 2009 | 0.88x | $172.30 Million | $195.70 Million | ▲ +106.2% |
| 2008 | -14.12x | $-1.00 Billion | $70.88 Million | ▼ -4426.2% |
| 2007 | -0.31x | $-19.00 Million | $60.91 Million | ▼ -100.3% |
| 2006 | 93.90x | $386.70 Million | $4.12 Million | ▲ +3007.3% |
| 2005 | 3.02x | $41.10 Million | $13.60 Million | ▼ -75.9% |
| 2004 | 12.56x | $276.40 Million | $22.00 Million | ▼ -90.6% |
| 2003 | 133.54x | $467.40 Million | $3.50 Million | ▲ +169.2% |
| 2002 | -193.10x | $-753.10 Million | $3.90 Million | ▼ -149.0% |
| 2001 | -77.56x | $-372.30 Million | $4.80 Million | ▼ -751.4% |
| 2000 | -9.11x | $-381.70 Million | $41.90 Million | ▼ -112.3% |
| 1999 | 73.80x | $376.40 Million | $5.10 Million | ▼ -66.5% |
| 1998 | 220.24x | $814.90 Million | $3.70 Million | ▲ +987.5% |
| 1997 | 20.25x | $716.90 Million | $35.40 Million | ▼ -87.8% |
| 1996 | 165.37x | $496.10 Million | $3.00 Million | — |