What it means
Equity is patient money that absorbs losses, while long-term debt is a contractual promise to pay regardless of how trading goes. Setting the two side by side shows who is really carrying the risk in a business and how much cushion lenders have if results disappoint.
The ratio matters most when conditions turn. A company at 0.3 can survive a poor year by simply earning less, whereas a company at 2.0 has repayments that continue at full size while profits shrink, which is how otherwise viable businesses run out of cash.
Boards use the ratio when setting a funding policy, often adopting a ceiling such as 1.0 that they will not cross without shareholder approval. Lenders frequently write similar limits into loan agreements as covenants, so breaching the ratio can trigger penalties or make a facility repayable on demand.
Borrowing is not the villain here, and a moderate ratio can lift returns to shareholders. If a business earns 12% on assets funded with debt costing 6%, that financial leverage adds to the owners' return, which is the legitimate argument for carrying some long-term debt.
Watch how equity is measured, because that is where the ratio can mislead. A company that has bought back shares or accumulated losses may show a small or even negative equity figure, which makes the ratio look enormous or renders it meaningless.
Owner-managed businesses need one further adjustment before the number means much. Loans from directors are often shown as liabilities even though they will never be called in while the company needs them, so many lenders reclassify that money as quasi-equity and recalculate the ratio on that basis.
In practice
Real-world examples.
Example
A bus operator sits at 1.6 because its fleet is financed over eight years. The finance director models a 10% fall in passenger revenue and finds that repayments would still be covered, so the board is comfortable holding the position.
Example
A design agency reports 0.05, having borrowed only for a small studio refurbishment. When it approaches a bank for a growth facility, the low leverage means the loan is agreed quickly and unsecured.
Example
A retailer that funded a share buyback with a ten-year loan sees its ratio move from 0.6 to 1.9, because debt rose while equity fell. A covenant capped at 1.5 is breached, and the bank charges a fee and imposes quarterly reporting until two years of retained profits rebuild equity and bring the ratio back within the agreed limit.
Think of it
“Long-term debt to equity shows the ratio of long-term borrowings to ownership-long-term leverage.
Formula
Calculation
Long-Term Debt to Equity Ratio = Long-Term Debt / Shareholders Equity
An equipment hire company has a term loan of $1,800,000 and lease liabilities of $600,000 falling due beyond one year, giving long-term debt of $2,400,000. Its shareholders' equity is $3,000,000, made up of $500,000 of share capital and $2,500,000 of retained profits.
Dividing $2,400,000 by $3,000,000 gives 0.80. Expressed another way, the company carries 80 cents of long-term debt per dollar of equity. If it retained a further $600,000 of profit, equity would rise to $3,600,000 and the ratio would fall to 0.67 without repaying a single dollar of debt.Case study
Seen in the real world.
Ravensmere Leisure is an invented operator of indoor climbing centres, used purely as an illustrative example. It borrowed $4 million over ten years to fit out four new sites, against equity of $2 million, giving a long-term debt to equity ratio of 2.0.
The sites performed well and the ratio began to fall as profits were retained. In this fictional case a competitor then opened nearby, memberships dipped by 12%, and the annual $650,000 of principal and interest suddenly looked far less comfortable against reduced earnings.
Rather than borrow more, Ravensmere raised $1.5 million from a minority investor and used $1 million to repay debt early. Long-term debt fell to $3 million and equity rose to $3.5 million, taking the ratio to roughly 0.86, and the founders judged that giving up a slice of ownership was a fair price for a funding structure that could survive a bad year.
Watch out
Common mistakes.
- Including short-term borrowing, which turns this measure into the general debt to equity ratio and makes comparisons inconsistent.
- Treating any ratio above 1.0 as dangerous, when asset-backed businesses with reliable income routinely run higher without difficulty.
- Ignoring director loans and similar related-party funding, which may sit in liabilities but behave much more like equity in practice.
Questions
People also ask.
What is a good long-term debt to equity ratio?
Between 0.3 and 1.0 is a common comfort zone for trading businesses, with capital intensive sectors accepting more and early-stage companies usually holding far less.
How is this different from gearing?
Gearing is a family of measures covering the same idea, and this ratio is one specific version of it that looks only at long-dated borrowing.
Can the ratio be negative?
Yes, if accumulated losses have pushed equity below zero, and at that point the ratio stops being informative and the focus shifts to solvency and cash.
From the founder's library
Take it further with the book.
Build your financial confidence beyond this definition. Shihan's full-length guide, Accounting Fundamentals, takes the same plain-English approach and turns it into a complete, practical playbook for non-finance managers, business owners and students - with chapter-end quiz answers and presentation slides included.
25% off with code MMHQ25, applied at checkout. Priced in USD - checkout may show the equivalent in your local currency.
View the book and save 25%