Nathans Famous Inc (NATH) — Tangible Net Worth Ratio
Nathans Famous Inc (NATH) has a Tangible Net Worth Ratio of 97.5% as of December 2014. This metric is calculated by deducting intangible assets ($1.35 Million) from net assets ($53.15 Million) and expressing it as a percentage of total net assets. A higher ratio means that more of the company's equity is backed by tangible, balance-sheet-verifiable assets rather than goodwill, patents, or brand value. See NATH current assets to equity ratio to evaluate short-term liquidity relative to the company's equity base.
Tangible NW Ratio
Net Assets (Equity)
Intangible Assets
Total Assets
Nathans Famous Inc Tangible Net Worth Ratio (1993–2014)
This chart shows how Nathans Famous Inc's Tangible Net Worth Ratio has changed across 21 annual periods from 1993 to 2014. As of December 2014, the ratio stands at 97.5%, reflecting net assets of $53.15 Million with intangible assets of $1.35 Million USD. See operational self-sufficiency of Nathans Famous Inc to measure how many days the company can operate on defensive assets alone.
Annual Tangible Net Worth Ratio for Nathans Famous Inc (1993–2014)
The table below presents the year-by-year Tangible Net Worth Ratio for Nathans Famous Inc from 1993 to 2014, covering 21 annual filings. Each row shows net assets, intangible assets, total assets, the tangible net worth ratio, and the change in percentage points versus the prior year. For the full company profile including market capitalisation, see Nathans Famous Inc (NATH) total market value.
| Year | Tangible NW Ratio | Net Assets (USD) | Intangible Assets | Total Assets | Change (pp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 96.9% | $43.90 Million | $1.35 Million | $56.13 Million | ▲ +0.9 pp |
| 2013 | 96.0% | $34.15 Million | $1.35 Million | $49.66 Million | ▲ +0.7 pp |
| 2012 | 95.3% | $28.84 Million | $1.35 Million | $44.52 Million | ▼ -1.1 pp |
| 2011 | 96.4% | $38.08 Million | $1.35 Million | $52.96 Million | ▼ -0.5 pp |
| 2010 | 96.9% | $44.31 Million | $1.35 Million | $53.37 Million | ▲ +0.2 pp |
| 2009 | 96.8% | $41.85 Million | $1.35 Million | $49.82 Million | ▲ +0.9 pp |
| 2008 | 95.9% | $42.61 Million | $1.75 Million | $51.20 Million | ▲ +6.0 pp |
| 2007 | 89.9% | $35.88 Million | $3.63 Million | $46.58 Million | ▲ +3.7 pp |
| 2006 | 86.2% | $28.05 Million | $3.88 Million | $37.42 Million | ▼ -0.3 pp |
| 2005 | 86.4% | $21.36 Million | $2.90 Million | $31.27 Million | ▲ +4.6 pp |
| 2004 | 81.8% | $17.35 Million | $3.16 Million | $27.58 Million | ▲ +2.6 pp |
| 2003 | 79.2% | $16.38 Million | $3.41 Million | $25.89 Million | ▲ +26.5 pp |
| 2002 | 52.6% | $36.15 Million | $17.12 Million | $48.74 Million | ▲ +4.0 pp |
| 2001 | 48.6% | $35.03 Million | $18.01 Million | $51.83 Million | ▲ +5.8 pp |
| 2000 | 42.7% | $33.35 Million | $19.09 Million | $48.58 Million | ▼ -15.8 pp |
| 1999 | 58.6% | $26.30 Million | $10.90 Million | $31.30 Million | ▲ +6.4 pp |
| 1998 | 52.1% | $23.60 Million | $11.30 Million | $29.50 Million | ▲ +4.8 pp |
| 1997 | 47.3% | $22.00 Million | $11.60 Million | $27.80 Million | ▼ -7.3 pp |
| 1995 | 54.5% | $27.50 Million | $12.50 Million | $32.40 Million | ▲ +0.6 pp |
| 1994 | 53.9% | $28.00 Million | $12.90 Million | $32.70 Million | ▲ +7.8 pp |
| 1993 | 46.1% | $24.50 Million | $13.20 Million | $29.50 Million | — |