Winmark Corporation (WINA) — Tangible Net Worth Ratio
Winmark Corporation (WINA) has a Tangible Net Worth Ratio of 100.0% as of December 2019. This metric is calculated by deducting intangible assets ($0.00) from net assets ($12.45 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 working capital to net assets of Winmark Corporation to evaluate short-term liquidity relative to the company's equity base.
Tangible NW Ratio
Net Assets (Equity)
Intangible Assets
Total Assets
Winmark Corporation Tangible Net Worth Ratio (1993–2019)
This chart shows how Winmark Corporation's Tangible Net Worth Ratio has changed across 23 annual periods from 1993 to 2019. As of December 2019, the ratio stands at 100.0%, reflecting net assets of $12.45 Million with intangible assets of $0.00 USD. See WINA days of operational coverage to measure how many days the company can operate on defensive assets alone.
Annual Tangible Net Worth Ratio for Winmark Corporation (1993–2019)
The table below presents the year-by-year Tangible Net Worth Ratio for Winmark Corporation from 1993 to 2019, covering 23 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 market value of Winmark Corporation.
| Year | Tangible NW Ratio | Net Assets (USD) | Intangible Assets | Total Assets | Change (pp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 100.0% | $12.45 Million | $0.00 | $61.84 Million | ▼ -20422.5 pp |
| 2014 | 20522.5% | $21.61 Million | $-4.41 Billion | $54.73 Million | ▲ +9388.7 pp |
| 2013 | 11133.8% | $38.14 Million | $-4.21 Billion | $53.04 Million | ▼ -8770.5 pp |
| 2012 | 19904.3% | $17.93 Million | $-3.55 Billion | $43.54 Million | ▲ +19804.3 pp |
| 2011 | 100.0% | $35.11 Million | $0.00 | $47.75 Million | ▲ +0.0 pp |
| 2010 | 100.0% | $23.01 Million | $0.00 | $42.12 Million | ▲ +0.0 pp |
| 2009 | 100.0% | $15.33 Million | $0.00 | $56.80 Million | ▲ +0.0 pp |
| 2008 | 100.0% | $13.89 Million | $0.00 | $58.11 Million | ▲ +0.0 pp |
| 2007 | 100.0% | $12.67 Million | $0.00 | $56.95 Million | ▲ +3.9 pp |
| 2006 | 96.1% | $15.76 Million | $608.00K | $37.61 Million | ▼ -1.1 pp |
| 2005 | 97.3% | $22.29 Million | $607.50K | $26.55 Million | ▲ +0.3 pp |
| 2004 | 97.0% | $21.56 Million | $654.60K | $24.77 Million | ▲ +0.9 pp |
| 2003 | 96.1% | $15.41 Million | $600.60K | $19.16 Million | ▲ +0.6 pp |
| 2002 | 95.5% | $11.90 Million | $538.70K | $16.18 Million | ▲ +2.8 pp |
| 2001 | 92.7% | $6.62 Million | $486.20K | $12.29 Million | ▲ +7.8 pp |
| 2000 | 84.9% | $3.47 Million | $524.30K | $14.72 Million | ▲ +46.9 pp |
| 1999 | 37.9% | $2.90 Million | $1.80 Million | $29.60 Million | ▼ -15.0 pp |
| 1998 | 52.9% | $10.20 Million | $4.80 Million | $43.10 Million | ▼ -8.2 pp |
| 1997 | 61.1% | $17.50 Million | $6.80 Million | $37.80 Million | ▼ -32.6 pp |
| 1996 | 93.8% | $17.70 Million | $1.10 Million | $29.20 Million | ▼ -1.0 pp |
| 1995 | 94.8% | $21.20 Million | $1.10 Million | $34.00 Million | ▼ -0.6 pp |
| 1994 | 95.4% | $21.70 Million | $1.00 Million | $39.60 Million | ▲ +6.5 pp |
| 1993 | 88.9% | $19.80 Million | $2.20 Million | $31.80 Million | — |