financial-metrics
EBITDA margin is EBITDA divided by revenue. It shows how much of each unit of sales remains after cash operating costs but before depreciation, interest, tax and capex.
EBITDA is a euro amount. EBITDA margin is that amount scaled by revenue, which is what lets you compare a €12m software firm with a €120m manufacturer before you argue about multiples.
EBITDA margin = EBITDA / Revenue
Use the same revenue definition in the denominator that sits above the EBITDA you chose (reported vs adjusted; IFRS vs “billings”). Mixing adjusted EBITDA with IFRS revenue, or ARR with EBITDA, produces a ratio nobody can audit.
Illustration only. Two hypothetical peers in the same process.
| Company A (product) | Company B (services-heavy) | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | €25.0m | €25.0m |
| EBITDA | €5.5m | €3.0m |
| EBITDA margin | 22% | 12% |
| Maintenance CAPEX | €0.4m | €0.2m |
| Δ Working capital (use) | €0.1m | €1.8m |
A looks “higher quality” on margin. B’s cash conversion is weaker because project receivables balloon. A buyer paying an EBITDA multiple on A still needs to test whether the 22% is sustainable if input costs mean-revert.
Read it next to gross margin (unit economics) and operating margin (after D&A). If gross margin is flat and EBITDA margin expands, the story is operating leverage or cost cuts — not pricing power.
Pricing grids in teasers; lender base-case vs downside; commercial diligence on whether margin is mix, price, or cost.
Margin ignores capital intensity. Two 18% EBITDA businesses can have wildly different ROIC. Adjusted margins that add back “revenue-generating” founder costs are not comparable to public-company reported margins.
Dazur computes reported and adjusted EBITDA margin from the same structured P&L so a comparable companies screen and the company file do not silently use different numerators.