How to value tech companies with negative earnings
Indian investors seeking exposure to high-growth US tech stocks often encounter companies with substantial losses but promising futures. Traditional P/E ratios become meaningless when earnings are negative, requiring alternative valuation frameworks. This guide provides a complete toolkit with current 2024-2025 data for companies such as Snowflake, Palantir, CrowdStrike, and Datadog.
Mastering fundamental analysis tools for Indian investors lays the foundation for applying specialised valuation metrics to loss-making tech companies.
Why P/E ratios fail for unprofitable tech companies
When a company reports losses, dividing price by negative earnings yields meaningless results, a company trading at $100 per share with -$5 EPS has a P/E of -20x. This figure provides no valuation insight. This fundamental limitation affects roughly 40% of publicly traded US tech companies that remain GAAP-unprofitable while aggressively reinvesting in growth.
While understanding the P/E ratio to value stocks works well for profitable companies, alternative frameworks become essential when earnings turn negative.
Revenue-based multiples solve this problem by measuring what investors pay for each dollar of sales, regardless of profitability. The two primary metrics are EV/Revenue (Enterprise Value to Revenue) and Price-to-Sales (P/S). EV/Revenue is preferred because it accounts for both equity and debt, making comparisons capital-structure neutral. The formula is straightforward:
EV/Revenue = Enterprise Value ÷ Annual Revenue
where Enterprise Value = Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
SaaS companies particularly benefit from revenue multiples because their subscription models create accounting disconnects between P&L statements and cash flow. Revenue is also far less susceptible to manipulation than earnings figures.
Revenue multiples: benchmarks and interpretation
Understanding what constitutes cheap versus expensive requires context. Current January 2026 data shows dramatic variation across the tech landscape. Palantir trades at 100-154x EV/Revenue with 47% revenue growth, driven by AI momentum—crowdStrike trades at 15-18x with 22% growth, reflecting cybersecurity mission-critical premium. Snowflake trades at 15-17x with 29% growth as a data cloud leader. Datadog trades at 12-15x with 26% growth and achieves GAAP profitability.
Historical context matters enormously. Public SaaS multiples peaked at 18-19x median in early 2021, collapsed to 3.3- 6.7x by 2023, and have stabilised in the 5- 7x range for the broader market. Elite performers command substantial premiums above these medians.
Revenue multiple benchmarks vary by growth rate. Companies growing below 10% typically trade at 2-4x. A 10-20% growth rate commands a 4-6x multiple. A 20-30% growth rate commands a 6-10x multiple. A 30-40% growth rate commands a 10-15x multiple. A 40-50% growth rate commands a 15-25x multiple. Companies growing above 50% can trade at 20-40x or higher.
However, revenue multiples have a critical blind spot. They ignore the path to profitability entirely. Two companies with identical revenue can have vastly different margin trajectories. This makes additional metrics essential for complete analysis.
The Rule of 40 captures the growth-profitability tradeoff
The Rule of 40, popularised by venture capitalist Brad Feld in 2015, provides a single metric that balances growth against profitability:
Rule of 40 = Revenue Growth Rate (%) + Profit Margin (%) ≥ 40%
A company growing at 60% can justify a -20% margin because 60 + (-20) = 40. A mature company growing at 15% needs a 25% margin. This flexibility makes the Rule of 40 particularly powerful for evaluating unprofitable companies that sacrifice current margins for growth.
Industry standard practice uses EBITDA margin for private SaaS and Free Cash Flow margin for public companies. The SaaS Metrics Standards Board recommends FCF margin because it's less susceptible to accounting manipulation and represents actual cash available.
Current Rule of 40 scores show clear leaders. CrowdStrike achieves approximately 49% with 22% growth plus 27% FCF margin. Datadog achieves approximately 51%, with 26% growth and a 25% FCF margin. Palantir achieves approximately 63,% with 47% growthand as 16% margin. Cloudflare passes at approximately 44% with 31% growth plus 13% FCF margin.
Companies exceedithe ng Rule of 40 trade at valuations double those below the threshold and achieve returns up to 15% higher ththe an S&P 500. Only about 16-40% of software companies consistently exceed this benchmark.
The Rule of 40 has limitations. It oversimplifies by using only two variables, ignoring critical factors like unit economics, customer retention, and growth durability. Bessemer Venture Partners developed Rule of X as an alternative, weighing growth 2-3x more than profitability.
Unit economics reveal whether losses translate to future profits
Aggregate losses can be misleading. What matters is whether each customer generates profitable unit economics. A company losing $100M annually might have excellent fundamentals indicating inevitable profitability at scale.
LTV (Lifetime Value) measures the total revenue expected from a customer. The calculation is: LTV = (ARPU × Gross Margin) / Churn Rate. For example: $100 monthly ARPU × 80% gross margin ÷ 5% monthly churn = $1,600 LTV.
CAC (Customer Acquisition Cost) measures the spending to acquire each customer. The calculation is: CAC = Total Sales & Marketing Expenses / New Customers Acquired.
LTV/CAC ratio benchmarks guide interpretation. A 1:1 ratio below 1 means losing money on every customer, which is unsustainable. Ratios of 1:1 to 2:1 fall within the danger zone, with little margin for error. Ratios of 3:1 to 4:1 represent the ideal sweet spot for sustainable growth. A ratio above 5:1 may indicate underinvestment in growth. The 3:1 benchmark is universally validated across SaaS research.
CAC payback period measures how quickly customer acquisition costs are recovered. The formula is: CAC Payback Period (months) = CAC / (ARPU × Gross Margin). Best-in-class companies achieve in under 12 months. Good performance is 12-18 months. Concerning is 18-24 months. Critical warning appears above 24 months.
Net Revenue Retention separates winners from losers
NRR (Net Revenue Retention) measures whether existing customers spend more over time, independent of new customer acquisition:
NRR = (Starting MRR + Expansion - Contraction - Churn) / Starting MRR × 100
NRR above 100% means the company grows even without acquiring a single new customer. This is the defining characteristic of the best SaaS businesses.
Best-in-class companies achieve NRR above 130%. Excellent performance is 120-130%. Good is 100-120%. Below 100% is concerning.
Current NRR for key companies shows strong performance. Snowflake achieves 125-127%, down from 170% at IPO. Datadog maintains stable mid-110s. CrowdStrike achieves 115-120% despite the July 2024 outage. MongoDB achieves 119% growth, with customers increasing their spend 2.1x over 24 months.
Companies with NRR above 120% trade at a 63% premium to the market median. Declining NRR warrants attention. Snowflake's drop from 170% to 125% over two years signals a maturing customer base.
Gross margin determines long-term profitability potential.
For loss-making companies, gross margin reveals whether the business model can ever become profitable. High gross margins mean more money available for R&D, sales, and eventually profit after fixed costs are covered.
Gross margin benchmarks vary by tech sub-sector. SaaS and software companies target 70-85%, with best-in-class at 80-90%. E-commerce and marketplaces achieve 30-50%, with a healthy range of 50-70%. Hardware achieves 20-40%. Cloud infrastructure achieves 55-65%.
Current gross margins for key companies show strong performance. Datadog achieves 81%, which is excellent and drives profitability. Palantir achieves 80% with strong software economics. CrowdStrike achieves 78-81% with the premium cybersecurity model. MongoDB achieves 75-77%, healthy for a database company. Snowflake achieves 66.5%, lower due to data infrastructure intensity.
Gross margin is extremely difficult to improve post-scale. Public SaaS companies are essentially locked into their gross margin profile by the time they IPO. Companies with gross margins below 70% face structural challenges in achieving profitability.
Path to profitability: when do losses become profits
For unprofitable companies, evaluating the credible timeline to profitability is essential. Operating leverage is the key mechanism. As revenue scales, losses should shrink proportionally because fixed costs grow more slowly than revenue.
Companies that achieved profitability show varied timelines. Uber was founded in 2009 and became profitable in 2023, a 14-year journey. DoorDash was founded in 2013 and became profitable in 2024, an 11-year journey. Airbnb was founded in 2008 and became profitable in 2022, a 14-year journey. Palantir was founded in 2003 and became profitable in 2023, taking 20 years.
Palantir's profitability journey illustrates the progression. In 2020, the company posted a $1.17B loss with a 107% operating margin. By 2022, the loss narrowed to -$374M, with an operating margin of -8.5%. In 2023, Palantir achieved its first GAAP profitable year with +$210M profit and 5.4% operating margin. By 2024, profit grew to +$462 ,with 1a 6% net margin.
The MD&A section (Item 7) of 10-K filings is most critical for profitability analysis. It contains management's view on results, margin trends, and strategic outlook. Look for specific profitability targets with dates, margin improvement commentary, and operating leverage expectations.
Current financial profiles of key unprofitable tech companies
Snowflake reports $4.4B TTM revenue in Q3 FY2026 with 29% YoY growth. The company posts $324M quarterly net loss on a GAAP basis. NRR stands at 125%, down from 135% a year ago. Non-GAAP gross margin is 75%. Stock-based compensation runs approximately 40% of revenue, which is a major concern. Snowflake targets $10B in product revenue by FY2029 but remains GAAP-unprofitable.
CrowdStrike reports $4.0B FY2025 revenue with $4.92B ARR in Q3 FY2026. The company is near GAAP break-even and achieves non-GAAP profitability. GAAP gross margin is 78% and non-GAAP is 81%. Rule of 40 score is approximately 49%, a strong pass. Free cash flow reached a record $1.07B in FY2025.
Datadog reports $886M quarterly revenue in Q3 2025 with 28% YoY growth. The company is GAAP profitable with $51.7M net income in Q3 2024. Gross margin is 81%. NRR is in the mid-110s. FCF margin is 30%.
MongoDB reports FY2025 revenue of $2.01B, up 19%. The company posts approximately $55M quarterly net loss. Gross margin is 75-77%. Atlas cloud growth is 30% YoY. Customer count exceeds 62,500, up from 54,500.
SentinelOne reports $821M FY2025 revenue with 32% growth. The company posts $288M FY2025 net loss. Non-GAAP gross margin is 78-79%. Management targets a 3-4% non-GAAP operating margin in FY2026.
Comparable company analysis for an unprofitable tech
When P/E is not applicable, comparable company analysis relies on revenue-based metrics. The process involves selecting a peer universe with a similar business model, size, and growth rate. Calculate the Enterprise Value for each company. Spread multiples including EV/Revenue, EV/Gross Profit, and EV/ARR. Apply the median or percentile multiple to the target company. Adjust for growth rate differences.
Growth-adjusted multiples provide additional insight. The formula is: Growth-Adjusted Multiple = EV/Revenue ÷ Revenue Growth Rate. For example: Company A at 15x with 50% growth = 0.30x adjusted. Company B at 10x with 25% growth = 0.40x adjusted. Company A is relatively cheaper despite a higher headline multiple.
Current comparable multiples vary by sub-sector. Enterprise SaaS trades at 4-8x, with a median of around 6x. Cybersecurity commands 8-25x premium for mission-critical applications. Cloud infrastructure trades at 6-12x. AI/ML companiesexhibitw extreme varianc,eranging from 15x to 60xx. Fintech trades at 4-10x. Database and data companies trade at 10-20x.
How interest rates crushed unprofitable tech valuations
The 2021-2022 multiple compression provides essential context. SaaS revenue multiples peaked at 18-19x median in early 2021. Multiples collapsed to 3.3-6.7x by early 2023, representing a 60-80% decline. The top 25 fastest-growing companies saw peak multiples of 50.8x fall to 8.8x, an 80% decline. The total public SaaS market cap lost approximately $1 trillion.
Unprofitable growth stocks behave like long-duration bonds. Their value depends on future cash flows. When discount rates rise via higher interest rates, the present value of distant cash flows decreases dramatically. A company with cash flows 10 years out is hit harder than one with cash flows 2 years out.
During 2022, Google and Microsoft, which are profitable, declined approximately 20%. High-growth cash-burning companies like Asana declined approximately 75%.
The current rate environment in January 2026 shows the Federal funds rate at 3.5%-3.75%, held steady. Recent cuts included three consecutive 25bps cuts in late 2025. The Fed projects only 1-2 cuts expected in 2026. Core PCE inflation remains at 2.8-2.9%, above the 2% target.
The stabilised but elevated rate environment means unprofitable tech won't see a return to 2021 multiples. The new normal appears to be 5-8x EV/Revenue for median SaaS companies.
Red flags that signal danger in loss-making tech
Financial warning signs include stock-based compensation above 20-30% of revenue, cash runway below 12-18 months, customer concentration with a single customer above 10% of revenue, annual dilution above 4%, and gross margin below 70% for SaaS.
Stock-based compensation deserves special attention. Some software companies have SBCs exceeding 50% of revenue, creating significant gaps between GAAP and non-GAAP profitability. Snowflake's SBC runs approximately 40% of revenue.
Operational red flags include slowing revenue growth without improving margins, declining gross margins that cannot be offset by scale, rising CAC with falling LTV, management unable to articulate contribution margins or break-even points, and frequent changes in accounting firms.
Business model red flags include no operating leveragewhene growth requires proportional cost increases, commodityservicese with no pricing power,overdependencee on continuous venture funding, and negative unit economics atthe cthe ustomer level.
A practical valuation framework for Indian investors
Step 1 screens for business quality. Target gross margin above 70% for SaaS, NRR above 100% with preference for 110%+, LTV/CAC above 3:1, and CAC payback under 18 months.
Step 2 evaluates the Rule of 40. Companies exceeding 40% deserve premium valuations. A score below 40% requires a clear path to improvement.
Step 3 assesses revenue multiple reasonableness. Below 5x represents potential value if growth exceeds 20%. Multiples of 5-10x represent fair value for 20-30% growth with strong metrics. Multiples of 10-15x are premium requiring 30-40% growth plus exceptional fundamentals. Above 15x is speculative and needs AI or platform premium justification. Above 50x requires extreme caution.
Step 4 checks path to profitability. Look for management guidance with specific timelines, operating leverage evidence with margins improving as revenue scales, stock-based compensation trending down as percentage of revenue, and cash runway above 18 months.
Step 5 monitors red flags. Watch for slowing growth without margin improvement, customer concentration above 10%, SBC above 20% of revenue, and declining NRR.
Valuing unprofitable tech companies requires abandoning traditional P/E analysis in favor of a multi-metric framework. Revenue multiples provide the baseline, but they must be interpreted alongside Rule of 40 scores, unit economics, gross margin quality, and net revenue retention rates. The 2021-2022 multiple compression demonstrated that interest rates matter enormously for long-duration growth assets.
For Indian investors in US tech, the key insight is that losses alone don't determine value. The quality of those losses does. A company burning cash with 3:1+ LTV/CAC, 120%+ NRR, and 75%+ gross margins is fundamentally different from one burning cash with deteriorating unit economics. Palantir's 20-year journey to profitability, Uber's 14-year path, and DoorDash's 11-year timeline demonstrate that patience can pay off. But only when underlying unit economics justify the wait.
Disclaimer: The views and recommendations made above are those of individual analysts or brokerage companies, and not of Winvesta. We advise investors to check with certified experts before making any investment decisions.
Ready to earn on every trade?
Invest in 11,000+ US stocks & ETFs
Table of Contents
Indian investors seeking exposure to high-growth US tech stocks often encounter companies with substantial losses but promising futures. Traditional P/E ratios become meaningless when earnings are negative, requiring alternative valuation frameworks. This guide provides a complete toolkit with current 2024-2025 data for companies such as Snowflake, Palantir, CrowdStrike, and Datadog.
Mastering fundamental analysis tools for Indian investors lays the foundation for applying specialised valuation metrics to loss-making tech companies.
Why P/E ratios fail for unprofitable tech companies
When a company reports losses, dividing price by negative earnings yields meaningless results, a company trading at $100 per share with -$5 EPS has a P/E of -20x. This figure provides no valuation insight. This fundamental limitation affects roughly 40% of publicly traded US tech companies that remain GAAP-unprofitable while aggressively reinvesting in growth.
While understanding the P/E ratio to value stocks works well for profitable companies, alternative frameworks become essential when earnings turn negative.
Revenue-based multiples solve this problem by measuring what investors pay for each dollar of sales, regardless of profitability. The two primary metrics are EV/Revenue (Enterprise Value to Revenue) and Price-to-Sales (P/S). EV/Revenue is preferred because it accounts for both equity and debt, making comparisons capital-structure neutral. The formula is straightforward:
EV/Revenue = Enterprise Value ÷ Annual Revenue
where Enterprise Value = Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
SaaS companies particularly benefit from revenue multiples because their subscription models create accounting disconnects between P&L statements and cash flow. Revenue is also far less susceptible to manipulation than earnings figures.
Revenue multiples: benchmarks and interpretation
Understanding what constitutes cheap versus expensive requires context. Current January 2026 data shows dramatic variation across the tech landscape. Palantir trades at 100-154x EV/Revenue with 47% revenue growth, driven by AI momentum—crowdStrike trades at 15-18x with 22% growth, reflecting cybersecurity mission-critical premium. Snowflake trades at 15-17x with 29% growth as a data cloud leader. Datadog trades at 12-15x with 26% growth and achieves GAAP profitability.
Historical context matters enormously. Public SaaS multiples peaked at 18-19x median in early 2021, collapsed to 3.3- 6.7x by 2023, and have stabilised in the 5- 7x range for the broader market. Elite performers command substantial premiums above these medians.
Revenue multiple benchmarks vary by growth rate. Companies growing below 10% typically trade at 2-4x. A 10-20% growth rate commands a 4-6x multiple. A 20-30% growth rate commands a 6-10x multiple. A 30-40% growth rate commands a 10-15x multiple. A 40-50% growth rate commands a 15-25x multiple. Companies growing above 50% can trade at 20-40x or higher.
However, revenue multiples have a critical blind spot. They ignore the path to profitability entirely. Two companies with identical revenue can have vastly different margin trajectories. This makes additional metrics essential for complete analysis.
The Rule of 40 captures the growth-profitability tradeoff
The Rule of 40, popularised by venture capitalist Brad Feld in 2015, provides a single metric that balances growth against profitability:
Rule of 40 = Revenue Growth Rate (%) + Profit Margin (%) ≥ 40%
A company growing at 60% can justify a -20% margin because 60 + (-20) = 40. A mature company growing at 15% needs a 25% margin. This flexibility makes the Rule of 40 particularly powerful for evaluating unprofitable companies that sacrifice current margins for growth.
Industry standard practice uses EBITDA margin for private SaaS and Free Cash Flow margin for public companies. The SaaS Metrics Standards Board recommends FCF margin because it's less susceptible to accounting manipulation and represents actual cash available.
Current Rule of 40 scores show clear leaders. CrowdStrike achieves approximately 49% with 22% growth plus 27% FCF margin. Datadog achieves approximately 51%, with 26% growth and a 25% FCF margin. Palantir achieves approximately 63,% with 47% growthand as 16% margin. Cloudflare passes at approximately 44% with 31% growth plus 13% FCF margin.
Companies exceedithe ng Rule of 40 trade at valuations double those below the threshold and achieve returns up to 15% higher ththe an S&P 500. Only about 16-40% of software companies consistently exceed this benchmark.
The Rule of 40 has limitations. It oversimplifies by using only two variables, ignoring critical factors like unit economics, customer retention, and growth durability. Bessemer Venture Partners developed Rule of X as an alternative, weighing growth 2-3x more than profitability.
Unit economics reveal whether losses translate to future profits
Aggregate losses can be misleading. What matters is whether each customer generates profitable unit economics. A company losing $100M annually might have excellent fundamentals indicating inevitable profitability at scale.
LTV (Lifetime Value) measures the total revenue expected from a customer. The calculation is: LTV = (ARPU × Gross Margin) / Churn Rate. For example: $100 monthly ARPU × 80% gross margin ÷ 5% monthly churn = $1,600 LTV.
CAC (Customer Acquisition Cost) measures the spending to acquire each customer. The calculation is: CAC = Total Sales & Marketing Expenses / New Customers Acquired.
LTV/CAC ratio benchmarks guide interpretation. A 1:1 ratio below 1 means losing money on every customer, which is unsustainable. Ratios of 1:1 to 2:1 fall within the danger zone, with little margin for error. Ratios of 3:1 to 4:1 represent the ideal sweet spot for sustainable growth. A ratio above 5:1 may indicate underinvestment in growth. The 3:1 benchmark is universally validated across SaaS research.
CAC payback period measures how quickly customer acquisition costs are recovered. The formula is: CAC Payback Period (months) = CAC / (ARPU × Gross Margin). Best-in-class companies achieve in under 12 months. Good performance is 12-18 months. Concerning is 18-24 months. Critical warning appears above 24 months.
Net Revenue Retention separates winners from losers
NRR (Net Revenue Retention) measures whether existing customers spend more over time, independent of new customer acquisition:
NRR = (Starting MRR + Expansion - Contraction - Churn) / Starting MRR × 100
NRR above 100% means the company grows even without acquiring a single new customer. This is the defining characteristic of the best SaaS businesses.
Best-in-class companies achieve NRR above 130%. Excellent performance is 120-130%. Good is 100-120%. Below 100% is concerning.
Current NRR for key companies shows strong performance. Snowflake achieves 125-127%, down from 170% at IPO. Datadog maintains stable mid-110s. CrowdStrike achieves 115-120% despite the July 2024 outage. MongoDB achieves 119% growth, with customers increasing their spend 2.1x over 24 months.
Companies with NRR above 120% trade at a 63% premium to the market median. Declining NRR warrants attention. Snowflake's drop from 170% to 125% over two years signals a maturing customer base.
Gross margin determines long-term profitability potential.
For loss-making companies, gross margin reveals whether the business model can ever become profitable. High gross margins mean more money available for R&D, sales, and eventually profit after fixed costs are covered.
Gross margin benchmarks vary by tech sub-sector. SaaS and software companies target 70-85%, with best-in-class at 80-90%. E-commerce and marketplaces achieve 30-50%, with a healthy range of 50-70%. Hardware achieves 20-40%. Cloud infrastructure achieves 55-65%.
Current gross margins for key companies show strong performance. Datadog achieves 81%, which is excellent and drives profitability. Palantir achieves 80% with strong software economics. CrowdStrike achieves 78-81% with the premium cybersecurity model. MongoDB achieves 75-77%, healthy for a database company. Snowflake achieves 66.5%, lower due to data infrastructure intensity.
Gross margin is extremely difficult to improve post-scale. Public SaaS companies are essentially locked into their gross margin profile by the time they IPO. Companies with gross margins below 70% face structural challenges in achieving profitability.
Path to profitability: when do losses become profits
For unprofitable companies, evaluating the credible timeline to profitability is essential. Operating leverage is the key mechanism. As revenue scales, losses should shrink proportionally because fixed costs grow more slowly than revenue.
Companies that achieved profitability show varied timelines. Uber was founded in 2009 and became profitable in 2023, a 14-year journey. DoorDash was founded in 2013 and became profitable in 2024, an 11-year journey. Airbnb was founded in 2008 and became profitable in 2022, a 14-year journey. Palantir was founded in 2003 and became profitable in 2023, taking 20 years.
Palantir's profitability journey illustrates the progression. In 2020, the company posted a $1.17B loss with a 107% operating margin. By 2022, the loss narrowed to -$374M, with an operating margin of -8.5%. In 2023, Palantir achieved its first GAAP profitable year with +$210M profit and 5.4% operating margin. By 2024, profit grew to +$462 ,with 1a 6% net margin.
The MD&A section (Item 7) of 10-K filings is most critical for profitability analysis. It contains management's view on results, margin trends, and strategic outlook. Look for specific profitability targets with dates, margin improvement commentary, and operating leverage expectations.
Current financial profiles of key unprofitable tech companies
Snowflake reports $4.4B TTM revenue in Q3 FY2026 with 29% YoY growth. The company posts $324M quarterly net loss on a GAAP basis. NRR stands at 125%, down from 135% a year ago. Non-GAAP gross margin is 75%. Stock-based compensation runs approximately 40% of revenue, which is a major concern. Snowflake targets $10B in product revenue by FY2029 but remains GAAP-unprofitable.
CrowdStrike reports $4.0B FY2025 revenue with $4.92B ARR in Q3 FY2026. The company is near GAAP break-even and achieves non-GAAP profitability. GAAP gross margin is 78% and non-GAAP is 81%. Rule of 40 score is approximately 49%, a strong pass. Free cash flow reached a record $1.07B in FY2025.
Datadog reports $886M quarterly revenue in Q3 2025 with 28% YoY growth. The company is GAAP profitable with $51.7M net income in Q3 2024. Gross margin is 81%. NRR is in the mid-110s. FCF margin is 30%.
MongoDB reports FY2025 revenue of $2.01B, up 19%. The company posts approximately $55M quarterly net loss. Gross margin is 75-77%. Atlas cloud growth is 30% YoY. Customer count exceeds 62,500, up from 54,500.
SentinelOne reports $821M FY2025 revenue with 32% growth. The company posts $288M FY2025 net loss. Non-GAAP gross margin is 78-79%. Management targets a 3-4% non-GAAP operating margin in FY2026.
Comparable company analysis for an unprofitable tech
When P/E is not applicable, comparable company analysis relies on revenue-based metrics. The process involves selecting a peer universe with a similar business model, size, and growth rate. Calculate the Enterprise Value for each company. Spread multiples including EV/Revenue, EV/Gross Profit, and EV/ARR. Apply the median or percentile multiple to the target company. Adjust for growth rate differences.
Growth-adjusted multiples provide additional insight. The formula is: Growth-Adjusted Multiple = EV/Revenue ÷ Revenue Growth Rate. For example: Company A at 15x with 50% growth = 0.30x adjusted. Company B at 10x with 25% growth = 0.40x adjusted. Company A is relatively cheaper despite a higher headline multiple.
Current comparable multiples vary by sub-sector. Enterprise SaaS trades at 4-8x, with a median of around 6x. Cybersecurity commands 8-25x premium for mission-critical applications. Cloud infrastructure trades at 6-12x. AI/ML companiesexhibitw extreme varianc,eranging from 15x to 60xx. Fintech trades at 4-10x. Database and data companies trade at 10-20x.
How interest rates crushed unprofitable tech valuations
The 2021-2022 multiple compression provides essential context. SaaS revenue multiples peaked at 18-19x median in early 2021. Multiples collapsed to 3.3-6.7x by early 2023, representing a 60-80% decline. The top 25 fastest-growing companies saw peak multiples of 50.8x fall to 8.8x, an 80% decline. The total public SaaS market cap lost approximately $1 trillion.
Unprofitable growth stocks behave like long-duration bonds. Their value depends on future cash flows. When discount rates rise via higher interest rates, the present value of distant cash flows decreases dramatically. A company with cash flows 10 years out is hit harder than one with cash flows 2 years out.
During 2022, Google and Microsoft, which are profitable, declined approximately 20%. High-growth cash-burning companies like Asana declined approximately 75%.
The current rate environment in January 2026 shows the Federal funds rate at 3.5%-3.75%, held steady. Recent cuts included three consecutive 25bps cuts in late 2025. The Fed projects only 1-2 cuts expected in 2026. Core PCE inflation remains at 2.8-2.9%, above the 2% target.
The stabilised but elevated rate environment means unprofitable tech won't see a return to 2021 multiples. The new normal appears to be 5-8x EV/Revenue for median SaaS companies.
Red flags that signal danger in loss-making tech
Financial warning signs include stock-based compensation above 20-30% of revenue, cash runway below 12-18 months, customer concentration with a single customer above 10% of revenue, annual dilution above 4%, and gross margin below 70% for SaaS.
Stock-based compensation deserves special attention. Some software companies have SBCs exceeding 50% of revenue, creating significant gaps between GAAP and non-GAAP profitability. Snowflake's SBC runs approximately 40% of revenue.
Operational red flags include slowing revenue growth without improving margins, declining gross margins that cannot be offset by scale, rising CAC with falling LTV, management unable to articulate contribution margins or break-even points, and frequent changes in accounting firms.
Business model red flags include no operating leveragewhene growth requires proportional cost increases, commodityservicese with no pricing power,overdependencee on continuous venture funding, and negative unit economics atthe cthe ustomer level.
A practical valuation framework for Indian investors
Step 1 screens for business quality. Target gross margin above 70% for SaaS, NRR above 100% with preference for 110%+, LTV/CAC above 3:1, and CAC payback under 18 months.
Step 2 evaluates the Rule of 40. Companies exceeding 40% deserve premium valuations. A score below 40% requires a clear path to improvement.
Step 3 assesses revenue multiple reasonableness. Below 5x represents potential value if growth exceeds 20%. Multiples of 5-10x represent fair value for 20-30% growth with strong metrics. Multiples of 10-15x are premium requiring 30-40% growth plus exceptional fundamentals. Above 15x is speculative and needs AI or platform premium justification. Above 50x requires extreme caution.
Step 4 checks path to profitability. Look for management guidance with specific timelines, operating leverage evidence with margins improving as revenue scales, stock-based compensation trending down as percentage of revenue, and cash runway above 18 months.
Step 5 monitors red flags. Watch for slowing growth without margin improvement, customer concentration above 10%, SBC above 20% of revenue, and declining NRR.
Valuing unprofitable tech companies requires abandoning traditional P/E analysis in favor of a multi-metric framework. Revenue multiples provide the baseline, but they must be interpreted alongside Rule of 40 scores, unit economics, gross margin quality, and net revenue retention rates. The 2021-2022 multiple compression demonstrated that interest rates matter enormously for long-duration growth assets.
For Indian investors in US tech, the key insight is that losses alone don't determine value. The quality of those losses does. A company burning cash with 3:1+ LTV/CAC, 120%+ NRR, and 75%+ gross margins is fundamentally different from one burning cash with deteriorating unit economics. Palantir's 20-year journey to profitability, Uber's 14-year path, and DoorDash's 11-year timeline demonstrate that patience can pay off. But only when underlying unit economics justify the wait.
Disclaimer: The views and recommendations made above are those of individual analysts or brokerage companies, and not of Winvesta. We advise investors to check with certified experts before making any investment decisions.
Ready to earn on every trade?
Invest in 11,000+ US stocks & ETFs
