RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:ts9222The
debt to equity ratio that the financial sites are using is Total Debt/Equity, not
Total Liabilities to equity
https://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=EDV.TO+Key+Statistics
Those are old numbers showing a 65.74 ratio, it has since dropped to 50's range. It is nowhere near 95 that you want to say.
Those are real numbers of a real stock. That first investopedia link also uses Total Debt/Equity.
The second investopedia link is a theoretical definition when it is using Total Liabilities. It is not being used on financial sites in practice on real stocks because it is STUPID.
It does give a note saying "Note: Sometimes only interest-bearing, long-term debt is used instead of total liabilities in the calculation." so even investopedia acknowledges that not everyone uses Total Liabilities.
Using large numbers to demonstrate how ridiculous it is, take for example a company that has $1 Billion in accounts payable and $1 Billion in accounts receivable. The payables and receivables cancel each other to give a net of zero. Just because it is a larger company with more short term capital needs does not make it millions of times less valuable than a small company with $10k accounts payable and $10k accounts receivable which also nets to zero.
In your
Total Liabilities to equity ratio, you plug in the $1 Billion payable into the numerator, vastly skewing the ratio and ignore the $1 Billion receivable. In the denominator of equity, the plus and minus $1 Billion cancels each other out, so the $1 Billion only appears in the numerator and skews the ratio to a large amount. Compared to the other smaller company that has only $10k in the numerator with a small ratio. When both companies net to zero.
And the same for other short term assets like inventories, stockpiles, supplies, etc.
Financial sites with real stocks use Total Debt/Equity, and not
Total Liabilities to equity because
Total Liabilities to equity is STUPID.