Honey Badger Silver Inc (TUF) — Net Asset Quality Index
Honey Badger Silver Inc (TUF) has a Net Asset Quality Index of 71.4% as of September 2025. This metric measures the proportion of total assets financed by shareholders' equity — total assets of CA$2.77 Million minus total liabilities of CA$791.94K yields net assets of CA$1.98 Million. A higher index indicates a stronger, lower-leverage balance sheet. Check Honey Badger Silver Inc (TUF) liquid assets ratio to evaluate the company's liquid asset resilience ratio.
Quality Index
Net Assets
Total Assets
Total Liabilities
Honey Badger Silver Inc Net Asset Quality Index Over Time (2001–2024)
This chart shows how Honey Badger Silver Inc's Net Asset Quality Index has evolved across 24 annual periods from 2001 to 2024. As of September 2025, the index stands at 71.4%, representing net assets of CA$1.98 Million against total assets of CA$2.77 Million CAD. See working capital position of Honey Badger Silver Inc to evaluate short-term liquidity relative to the company's equity base.
Annual Net Asset Quality Index for Honey Badger Silver Inc (2001–2024)
The table below presents the year-by-year Net Asset Quality Index for Honey Badger Silver Inc from 2001 to 2024, covering 24 annual filings. Each row shows total assets, total liabilities, net assets, the quality index percentage, and the change in percentage points compared to the prior year. For market capitalisation and the full company profile, see Honey Badger Silver Inc (TUF) total market value.
| Year | Quality Index | Net Assets (CAD) | Total Assets | Total Liabilities | Change (pp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 40.1% | CA$260.61K | CA$649.37K | CA$388.75K | ▲ +100.7 pp |
| 2023 | -60.6% | CA$-208.49K | CA$344.01K | CA$552.50K | ▼ -112.5 pp |
| 2022 | 51.9% | CA$331.89K | CA$638.98K | CA$307.09K | ▼ -20.1 pp |
| 2021 | 72.0% | CA$1.76 Million | CA$2.44 Million | CA$683.47K | ▲ +28.1 pp |
| 2020 | 43.9% | CA$319.89K | CA$728.21K | CA$408.32K | ▲ +70.4 pp |
| 2019 | -26.5% | CA$-113.71K | CA$429.60K | CA$543.31K | ▼ -84.4 pp |
| 2018 | 57.9% | CA$670.21K | CA$1.16 Million | CA$486.64K | ▲ +86.9 pp |
| 2017 | -29.0% | CA$-116.34K | CA$401.11K | CA$517.44K | ▲ +719.3 pp |
| 2016 | -748.3% | CA$-703.56K | CA$94.02K | CA$797.58K | ▼ -713.3 pp |
| 2015 | -35.0% | CA$-140.65K | CA$401.73K | CA$542.38K | ▲ +57.3 pp |
| 2014 | -92.3% | CA$-284.88K | CA$308.73K | CA$593.60K | ▲ +11.4 pp |
| 2013 | -103.6% | CA$-447.62K | CA$431.86K | CA$879.48K | ▼ -172.7 pp |
| 2012 | 69.0% | CA$1.76 Million | CA$2.55 Million | CA$789.53K | ▼ -4.1 pp |
| 2011 | 73.1% | CA$2.07 Million | CA$2.83 Million | CA$762.26K | ▲ +85.4 pp |
| 2010 | -12.3% | CA$-62.07K | CA$503.68K | CA$565.75K | ▼ -74.7 pp |
| 2009 | 62.4% | CA$296.95K | CA$475.95K | CA$179.00K | ▼ -0.5 pp |
| 2008 | 62.9% | CA$338.63K | CA$538.15K | CA$199.52K | ▼ -33.3 pp |
| 2007 | 96.2% | CA$695.41K | CA$722.73K | CA$27.32K | ▼ -0.6 pp |
| 2006 | 96.9% | CA$1.17 Million | CA$1.21 Million | CA$38.04K | ▲ +33.3 pp |
| 2005 | 63.5% | CA$328.44K | CA$517.02K | CA$188.58K | ▼ -12.8 pp |
| 2004 | 76.3% | CA$582.10K | CA$762.45K | CA$180.35K | ▲ +0.9 pp |
| 2003 | 75.4% | CA$498.89K | CA$661.52K | CA$162.63K | ▲ +8.0 pp |
| 2002 | 67.4% | CA$1.03 Million | CA$1.53 Million | CA$498.63K | ▼ -30.2 pp |
| 2001 | 97.6% | CA$935.13K | CA$957.91K | CA$22.78K | — |