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 net assets of Urban One Inc Class D for net asset value and shareholders' equity analysis.
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. Also explore UONEK net asset momentum to track the company's year-over-year net asset growth rate.
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 company net worth.
| 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 | — |