CECelanese Corporation
Is the price fair?
Neither cheap nor expensive: modest expectations priced in, but at the top of its own P/E range.
Priced for a decline (~−8% a year). Little growth is priced in even as revenue fell 2% a year over three years, potential value, or a value trap.
Expensive vs its own history: P/E 13.8 vs a 10.0 median over 34 quarters (+38% vs median).
Against the whole market›
Percentile against every name Ryufin tracks. Higher is better; the tick marks the middle of the market. Context, not one of the checks above.
Where this answer is blind. The growth-implied estimate assumes a fixed discount rate; capital-heavy sectors look structurally rich on it.
What CE's price assumes
Today's price asks for −7.8% free cash flow growth a year; over the last three years Celanese Corporation delivered −13%, so the price is ahead of the record.
Price / sales · no P/E: the last twelve months did not end in a profit
- Free cash flow yield
- 14%
Free cash flow yield · Chemicals median 14%
- Growth the price implies
- −7.8%
Growth the price implies · The price pays for −7.8% free cash flow growth a year for a decade; the business has delivered −13% a year over the last three.
- Price / book
- 1.26
Price / book · today's price, trailing year to Jun 30, 2026
Details›
- Price / booktoday's price, trailing year to Jun 30, 2026
- 1.26
- EV / EBIToperating margin −7.1%: the multiple describes the denominator
- not meaningful
- EV / salestoday's price, trailing year to Jun 30, 2026
- 1.64
- Free cash flow, trailing twelve months
- $708M
- Market capitalisation109.7 million shares, counted Aug 3, 2026
- $5.24B
- 3-year revenue growth
- −1.9%
- 3-year free cash flow growth
- −13%
Multiples from SEC filings and end-of-day closes; implied growth from a reverse discounted cash flow. Group medians across the names Ryufin tracks.
What is it worth?
Today's price against what its own multiples, its cash flow and your growth assumption say it is worth.
Against its own past
Its multiples now against their own history, and how much of the price move came from earnings rather than the multiple.