Tri Continental Closed Fund (TY) — 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. See financial flexibility index of Tri Continental Closed Fund 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
Tri Continental Closed Fund Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio (1996–2021)
Historical debt coverage capacity for Tri Continental Closed Fund across 26 annual periods. For the full cash flow conversion analysis, see TY cash flow metrics.
Annual Cash Flow-to-Debt Ratio for Tri Continental Closed Fund (1996–2021)
Year-by-year debt coverage analysis for Tri Continental Closed Fund. Check cash flow quality index of Tri Continental Closed Fund to evaluate the quality of earnings relative to operating cash generation.
| 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 | — |