Urban One Inc Class D (UONEK) — Tangible Net Worth Ratio
Urban One Inc Class D (UONEK) has a Tangible Net Worth Ratio of 68.6% as of September 2025. This metric is calculated by deducting intangible assets ($25.53 Million) from net assets ($81.42 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 UONEK working capital ratio to evaluate short-term liquidity relative to the company's equity base.
Tangible NW Ratio
Net Assets (Equity)
Intangible Assets
Total Assets
Urban One Inc Class D Tangible Net Worth Ratio (1998–2024)
This chart shows how Urban One Inc Class D's Tangible Net Worth Ratio has changed across 21 annual periods from 1998 to 2024. As of September 2025, the ratio stands at 68.6%, reflecting net assets of $81.42 Million with intangible assets of $25.53 Million USD. See how many days can Urban One Inc Class D fund operations to measure how many days the company can operate on defensive assets alone.
Annual Tangible Net Worth Ratio for Urban One Inc Class D (1998–2024)
The table below presents the year-by-year Tangible Net Worth Ratio for Urban One Inc Class D from 1998 to 2024, 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 UONEK market cap.
| Year | Tangible NW Ratio | Net Assets (USD) | Intangible Assets | Total Assets | Change (pp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | -109.8% | $178.93 Million | $375.49 Million | $944.79 Million | ▼ -35.4 pp |
| 2023 | -74.4% | $290.58 Million | $506.85 Million | $1.21 Billion | ▼ -0.7 pp |
| 2022 | -73.7% | $362.67 Million | $629.99 Million | $1.34 Billion | ▲ +15.4 pp |
| 2021 | -89.1% | $322.33 Million | $609.50 Million | $1.33 Billion | ▲ +113.2 pp |
| 2020 | -202.3% | $199.60 Million | $603.29 Million | $1.20 Billion | ▲ +64.9 pp |
| 2019 | -267.2% | $193.64 Million | $711.03 Million | $1.25 Billion | ▼ -199.5 pp |
| 2012 | -67.7% | $578.05 Million | $969.51 Million | $2.04 Billion | ▲ +58.0 pp |
| 2011 | -125.7% | $430.94 Million | $972.82 Million | $1.49 Billion | ▲ +144.1 pp |
| 2010 | -269.8% | $194.34 Million | $718.73 Million | $999.21 Million | ▼ -74.1 pp |
| 2009 | -195.8% | $248.05 Million | $733.70 Million | $1.04 Billion | ▼ -39.7 pp |
| 2008 | -156.1% | $315.48 Million | $807.87 Million | $1.13 Billion | ▼ -51.3 pp |
| 2007 | -104.7% | $636.99 Million | $1.30 Billion | $1.67 Billion | ▼ -26.0 pp |
| 2006 | -78.8% | $1.02 Billion | $1.82 Billion | $2.20 Billion | ▲ +1.2 pp |
| 2005 | -80.0% | $1.02 Billion | $1.84 Billion | $2.20 Billion | ▼ -34.7 pp |
| 2004 | -45.4% | $1.33 Billion | $1.93 Billion | $2.11 Billion | ▼ -6.0 pp |
| 2003 | -39.4% | $1.28 Billion | $1.78 Billion | $2.02 Billion | ▲ +3.4 pp |
| 2002 | -42.8% | $1.24 Billion | $1.78 Billion | $1.98 Billion | ▲ +25.9 pp |
| 2001 | -68.7% | $1.05 Billion | $1.78 Billion | $1.92 Billion | ▼ -13.8 pp |
| 2000 | -54.9% | $1.06 Billion | $1.64 Billion | $1.77 Billion | ▼ -102.9 pp |
| 1999 | 48.0% | $420.30 Million | $218.50 Million | $527.50 Million | ▲ +7453.9 pp |
| 1998 | -7405.9% | $1.70 Million | $127.60 Million | $153.80 Million | — |