Homepage
FRESH Analysis Report
Jun 12, 2026
today · 100% complete · +6 refreshed

Match Group, Inc.

MTCH NASDAQ Categories PDF
Communication Services · Internet Content & Information
Dallas, TX 75231, United States IPO 1993 mtch.com Updated Jun 12, 3:00am
Price
$34.57
Market Cap
$8.1B
Employees
2,500
Beta
1.32
Avg Volume
4,742,200
CEO
Spencer Rascoff
Business Description

Match Group, Inc. is a global leader specializing in the provision of online dating and relationship services. Its extensive portfolio encompasses prominent platforms such as Tinder, Match, Meetic, OkCupid, Hinge, Pairs, PlentyOfFish, and OurTime, in addition to a variety of other niche applications. Founded in 1986, the company's base of operations is located in Dallas, Texas.

Business History
Generated: Jun 12, 2026 3:02am
Price Overview
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:00am (22h ago)
$34.57
+0.22 (+0.64%)
Day Range
$33.79 – $34.62
52-Week Range
$28.81 – $39.20
50-Day MA
$35.29
200-Day MA
$33.51
Volume
2,647,345.00
Analyst Price Targets
Low $37.00
Consensus $41.13
High $51.00
(73 analysts)
Share Structure
Outstanding 233,266,526.00
Float 231,378,703.00
Free Float 99.2%
High free float — 99.2% of shares trade freely, ~0.8% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:07am (22h ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:07am (22h ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
API Direct from provider CALC Derived from statements
Industry comparison last run: Jun 12, 2026 3:01am
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
API
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
12.66
Stock Price: $34.57
EPS (Diluted): 2.53
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
API
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
-30.91
Stock Price: $34.57
Total Equity: -$253.50M
Shares: 262,475,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
API
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
10.72
Market Cap: $8.06B
Total Debt: $3.97B
Cash: $1.03B
EBITDA: $999.21M
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
API
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$10.8B
Market Cap: $8.06B
Total Debt: $3.97B
Cash: $1.03B
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
API
Gross Profit / Revenue
72.8%
Gross Profit: $2.54B
Revenue: $3.49B
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
API
Operating Income / Revenue
25.0%
Operating Income: $872.53M
Revenue: $3.49B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
API
Net Income / Revenue
17.6%
Net Income: $613.45M
Revenue: $3.49B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
API
Net Income / Total Equity
-286.1%
Net Income: $613.45M
Total Equity: -$253.50M
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
API
NOPAT / Invested Capital
19.6%
Operating Income: $872.53M
Tax Rate: 17.8%
Equity: -$253.50M
Total Debt: $3.97B
Cash: $1.03B
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
API
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
1.42
Current Assets: $1.43B
Current Liabilities: $1.01B
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
CALC
Total Debt / Total Equity
-15.67
Short-Term Debt: $423.58M
Long-Term Debt: $3.55B
Total Debt: $3.97B
Total Equity: -$253.50M
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
CALC
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$13.29
Revenue: $3.49B
Shares: 262,475,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
CALC
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$-0.97
Total Equity: -$253.50M
Shares: 262,475,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
CALC
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$3.90
Operating CF: $1.08B
CapEx: -$56.77M
Shares: 262,475,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
API
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
2.4%
Last Dividend: N/A
Stock Price: $34.57
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
Dividends Paid / Net Income
Dividends Paid: N/A
Net Income: $613.45M
Dividends paid not available in cash flow statement
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Jun 12, 2026 3:01am
Compares MTCH against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Deep Analysis
Last run: Jun 12, 2026 3:05:46 am

Pre-flight intelligence scans the company first, then routes to the right analytical methods.

0 Company Classification — What type of company is this?
1 Industry Landscape — Where is the industry headed?
2 Company Momentum — Where is this company trending?
3 Forward Projection — 1Y & 2Y projected metrics (requires Layer 1 + 2)
4a DCF Valuation — Present value of future cash flows
4b Earnings Power Value — Floor value — worth with zero growth
4c Anchored PE — Industry PE adjusted for growth differential
4d Reverse DCF — What growth is the market pricing in?
4e Revenue-Based DCF — For growth/narrative companies (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4f Anchored P/S — Price-to-Sales peer comparison (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4g Scenario Analysis — Bull / Base / Bear (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4h Dividend Discount Model — For dividend/income stocks only
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4i Book Value Analysis — For deep value / turnaround stocks only
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4j Insider Activity — Are insiders buying or selling?
4f Cash Flow Quality — How trustworthy is the FCF?
4g Debt Maturity Risk — Can it handle its debt?
4h Macro Environment — Rates, market valuation, volatility
4i Sector Intelligence — How does this company compare within its sector?
4j Revenue Confidence — How reliable is the growth projection?
4k Sensitivity Analysis — How fragile is the fair value estimate?
4l Sector Demand Cycle — Is the sector in a boom, steady state, or contraction?
5 AI Investigation — Adaptive research engine (Claude)
5b Thesis Evaluation — What does the market believe? (narrative/platform stocks only)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
6 Valuation Synthesis — Weighted verdict from all methods (requires Layer 4)
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:07am (22h ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $3.0B $3.2B $3.4B $3.5B $3.5B
Cost of Revenue $839.3M $960.0M $954.0M $991.3M $948.4M
Gross Profit $2.1B $2.2B $2.4B $2.5B $2.5B
Operating Expenses $1.3B $1.7B $1.5B $1.7B $1.7B
Operating Income $851.7M $515.0M $916.9M $823.3M $872.5M
Net Income $277.7M $361.9M $651.5M $551.3M $613.4M
EBITDA $428.0M $566.6M $1.0B $951.6M $999.2M
EPS $1.01 $1.28 $2.36 $2.12 $2.53
EPS (Diluted)
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:00am (22h ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $815.4M $572.4M $862.4M $966.0M $1.0B
Total Current Assets $1.2B $882.4M $1.3B $1.4B $1.4B
Total Assets $5.1B $4.2B $4.5B $4.5B $4.5B
Current Liabilities $1.2B $556.4M $531.8M $549.5M $1.0B
Long-Term Debt $3.8B $3.8B $3.8B $3.8B $3.5B
Total Liabilities $5.3B $4.5B $4.5B $4.5B $4.7B
Total Equity -$203.8M -$359.9M -$19.5M -$63.7M -$253.5M
Retained Earnings -$8.1B -$7.8B -$7.1B -$6.6B -$6.0B
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:07am (22h ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow $912.5M $525.7M $896.8M $932.7M $1.1B
Capital Expenditure -$80.0M -$49.1M -$67.4M -$50.6M -$56.8M
Free Cash Flow $832.5M $476.6M $829.4M $882.1M $1.0B
Acquisitions (net) -$859.9M -$25.7M -$11.6M $0 $0
Debt Repayment
Dividends Paid
Stock Buybacks $0 -$482.0M -$546.2M -$752.7M -$788.8M
Net Change in Cash $76.2M -$243.0M $289.9M $103.6M $61.8M
Analyst Estimates (Annual)
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:00am (22h ago)
Metric 2027 2028 2029 2030
Revenue $3.6B
$3.5B – $3.7B
$3.8B
$3.8B – $3.8B
$4.1B
$4.0B – $4.2B
$4.3B
$4.2B – $4.4B
EBITDA $1.6B
$1.6B – $1.6B
$1.7B
$1.7B – $1.7B
$1.8B
$1.8B – $1.8B
$1.9B
$1.9B – $1.9B
Net Income $817.8M
$747.7M – $887.8M
$946.7M
$817.8M – $1.1B
$1.1B
$1.1B – $1.2B
$1.3B
$1.3B – $1.4B
EPS
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:07am (22h ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +6.9% +5.5% +3.4% +0.2%
Gross Profit Growth +4.0% +8.1% +3.2% +2.0%
Operating Income Growth -39.5% +78.0% -10.2% +6.0%
Net Income Growth +30.3% +80.0% -15.4% +11.3%
EBITDA Growth +32.4% +84.6% -9.0% +5.0%
Insider Trading (Recent)
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:05am (22h ago)
Type codes PPurchase SSale AAward / grant MOption exercise FIn-kind (tax) CConversion GGift DReturn to issuer
All SEC Form 4 codes
Open market
P Purchase
Open-market or private purchase of shares.
S Sale
Open-market or private sale of shares.
Compensation (Rule 16b-3)
A Award / grant
Grant or award of securities (RSUs, options, etc.) under Rule 16b-3.
D Return to issuer
Securities disposed back to the company under Rule 16b-3.
F In-kind (tax)
Shares withheld or delivered to pay the option-exercise price or tax — not an open-market sale.
I Discretionary
Discretionary transaction under an employee plan — Rule 16b-3(f).
M Option exercise
Exercise or conversion of a derivative (option/RSU) into shares — exempt.
Derivatives
C Conversion
Conversion of a derivative security into the underlying shares.
E Short expiration
Expiration of a short derivative position.
H Long expiration
Expiration or cancellation of a long derivative position with value received.
O OTM exercise
Exercise of an out-of-the-money derivative.
X ITM exercise
Exercise of an in-the-money or at-the-money derivative.
Other exempt
G Gift
Bona fide gift of securities.
L Small acquisition
Small acquisition under Rule 16a-6.
W Inheritance
Acquisition or disposition by will or the laws of descent.
Z Voting trust
Deposit into or withdrawal from a voting trust.
Other
J Other
Other acquisition or disposition (explained in a Form 4 footnote).
K Equity swap
Transaction in an equity swap or similar instrument.
U Tender / buyout
Disposition via tender of shares in a change-of-control transaction.

Compensation-plan codes (A, D, F, M) are routine and rarely directional. Open-market P (buy) and S (sale) carry the most signal.

Date Insider Type Shares Price Value
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M M-Exempt 71.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M M-Exempt 12,849.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M M-Exempt 540.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M M-Exempt 17,850.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M F-InKind 6,574.00 $36.13 $237,519
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M F-InKind 9,357.00 $36.13 $338,068
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M M-Exempt 12,849.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M M-Exempt 17,850.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M M-Exempt 540.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Rascoff Spencer M M-Exempt 71.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Hosseini Hesam M-Exempt 8,854.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Hosseini Hesam M-Exempt 267.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Hosseini Hesam M-Exempt 8,854.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Hosseini Hesam F-InKind 3,590.00 $36.13 $129,707
2026-06-01 Hosseini Hesam M-Exempt 267.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Eigenmann Philip D M-Exempt 11.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Eigenmann Philip D M-Exempt 2,007.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Eigenmann Philip D F-InKind 694.00 $36.13 $25,074
2026-06-01 Eigenmann Philip D M-Exempt 55.00 $0.00 $0
2026-06-01 Eigenmann Philip D M-Exempt 1,845.00 $0.00 $0
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Jun 12, 2026 3:00am (22h ago)
Date Dividend Declaration Record Payment
2026-07-07 $0.20 2026-05-03 2026-07-07 2026-07-21
2026-04-07 $0.20 2026-02-02 2026-04-07 2026-04-21
2026-01-06 $0.19 2025-11-03 2026-01-06 2026-01-21
2025-10-03 $0.19 2025-08-04 2025-10-03 2025-10-17
2025-07-03 $0.19 2025-05-07 2025-07-03 2025-07-18
2025-04-03 $0.19 2025-02-04 2025-04-03 2025-04-17
2025-01-06 $0.19 2024-12-11 2025-01-06 2025-01-21
2018-12-04 $2.00 2018-11-06 2018-12-05 2018-12-19
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for MTCH.
Delvantic AI Findings
Independent analyst synthesis · Delvantic - Cairn AI · generated 2026-06-12 03:06:53
Reviews the pipeline's own verdicts
Verdict Mildly undervalued cash cow — fair value $42-45 against $34.57; starter position justified at 12.7% FCF yield, but size up only after Q2 2026 confirms revenue stabilization above $850M.

The raw numbers tell a tighter story than the model committee acknowledges. Revenue is flat-to-stalling: $3.49B in 2025 vs $3.48B in 2024 is 0.2% growth, and the most recent quarter ($863.9M in Q1 2026) is actually below Q3 2025 ($914.3M) and roughly flat against Q2 2025 ($863.7M). Quarterly net income is bouncing between $117M and $209M with no clear trend — the 23.9% margin in Q4 2025 looks like a tax/one-time benefit rather than operating leverage, since op margin for the full year sits at 25.0% and Q1 2026 reverted to 19.3%. What is real and underrated: FCF of $1.02B on an $8.06B market cap is a 12.7% FCF yield, capex is trivial ($57M on $3.49B revenue, ~1.6%), and the 72.8% gross margin is intact. This is a cash cow with a stalled top line, not a deteriorating one — at least not yet.

Where I disagree with the model stack: the "pre-flight" classifier calling this a "pre-profit-platform" is simply wrong — MTCH has printed >$550M of net income for four consecutive years and >$1B of FCF. The Market Forces module's "leverage-heavy capital structure" claim is unsupported in the file (total debt is blanked, but the 1.42 current ratio and $1.03B cash don't scream distress; the negative book value reflects buybacks, not insolvency — MTCH has aggressively repurchased shares, which is why P/B is negative and ROE prints as -2.86). That's a capital-return feature, not a red flag. The Synthesis "fair value $40.57" and Narrative module's "-14.8% discount to DCF" are directionally consistent with my own back-of-envelope: 8x FCF for a 72% gross margin business with optionality on Hinge (growing double-digits within the portfolio) and Tinder stabilization is cheap on absolute terms, even granting zero growth.

The contrarian-to-the-contrarians case: every model is anchored on "Tinder saturation" as the dominant narrative, but the financials don't yet show terminal decline — they show a plateau. FCF CAGR of 11.1% against revenue CAGR of 1.8% is the signature of a business pulling margin and buyback levers, which works until it doesn't. The real bear case isn't valuation, it's that Hinge's growth eventually fails to offset Tinder's MAU decay and FCF rolls from $1.02B toward $750M over three years — at which point 12.7% yield becomes 9% on a lower price. The insider activity is uninformative (all M-Exempt option exercises and F-InKind tax withholdings — zero open-market buying signal in either direction; the models calling this "neutral" got it right by default). The data gaps that matter: no debt figure, no segment breakdown of Tinder vs Hinge vs Match.com revenue, and the quarterly deceleration flag (Q3→Q4→Q1 going $914M→$878M→$864M) deserves more weight than "Good Revenue Confidence" suggests — that's a 5.5% sequential decline over two quarters, not noise.

Net: I dissent from "fair value" and lean toward the Synthesis's signal-adjusted $40.57 as a floor, not a midpoint. A business generating 12.7% FCF yield with 73% gross margins, even with zero revenue growth, is worth 10-12x FCF, or $40-48/share. The market's "value trap" framing requires actual FCF erosion that hasn't shown up yet — Q1 2026 operating performance is in line with 2024, not below it. The asymmetry favors longs: downside to ~$28 (8x a hypothetically impaired $700M FCF) vs upside to $45+ on stabilization. I'd disagree with Market Forces' "likely value trap" verdict — that's a forecast dressed as an observation. Wait for the Q2 2026 print to confirm whether the sequential revenue decline is FX/seasonal or structural; if revenue holds above $850M and Hinge growth is disclosed at >25%, this re-rates to $42-45.

GPT Critique
Second-opinion review · gpt-4o · generated 2026-06-12 03:06:59
Reviews the Opus findings above
Verdict I align with Opus on the valuation being mildly undervalued but would peg fair value closer to $38-42, considering the sequential revenue decline and potential operational headwinds.

In my independent analysis of Match Group, Inc., I see a company with strong free cash flow (FCF) generation but facing concerning stagnation in revenue growth. The company reported $3.49 billion in revenue for 2025, a marginal increase from $3.48 billion in 2024, indicating an anemic growth rate of 0.2%. The most recent quarterly revenue of $863.9 million in Q1 2026 shows a decline from Q3 2025’s $914.3 million. This quarterly deceleration is a red flag and suggests the need for caution regarding the sustainability of their revenue base. Despite this, Match Group's FCF remains robust at $1.02 billion, yielding a substantial 12.7% return on its current market cap of $8.06 billion, underscoring its identity as a cash-generating entity with a high gross margin of 72.8%.

I agree with Opus's assertion that the "pre-profit-platform" classification is inaccurate for Match Group. As highlighted, Match has consistently generated over $550 million in net income annually for the past four years, solidifying its status as a mature, profitable enterprise. However, I diverge from Opus regarding the company's capital structure concerns. While Opus dismisses the leverage-heavy claim due to a lack of debt data, the negative book value does raise questions about the financial strategy focused on share buybacks. This approach could suggest a lack of better investment opportunities, potentially hinting at a strategic dead end if revenue growth remains stagnant.

Opus is correct in identifying the real risk as the potential failure of Hinge to compensate for Tinder's plateauing growth. The sequential revenue declines from Q3 to Q1 deserve attention beyond the optimistic "Good Revenue Confidence" label. This trend suggests that the market's "value trap" narrative might not be entirely unfounded if the anticipated growth from Hinge does not materialize as expected. The lack of open market insider transactions further supports a cautious stance, as it indicates limited internal confidence in the stock's undervaluation narrative.

A careful skeptic might argue that both Opus and I are underestimating the potential regulatory risks and competitive pressures from newer entrants, which could further erode Match Group's market position. Additionally, the reliance on high FCF yields might be overly optimistic if revenue growth fails to pick up, leading to potential downward valuation adjustments if investors start pricing in a prolonged stagnation or decline.

Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · two lenses
Two separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?) and Valuation (is it mispriced?), kept deliberately apart · 2026-06-12 03:08:42
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Quality cash cow — starter now, scale on weakness 6/10
Strong cash machine (Q:21) at a only-modestly-cheap price (V:0) — worth a starter here, but the real fat pitch is sub-$30.
The cruxWhether Tinder payer erosion stabilizes long enough for buybacks and Hinge to carry per-share value — that single variable decides if $34 is cheap or if $27 is fair.
Company Quality
+21
Strong
edge √Σ 123 · risk √Σ 102 · conf 7/10
Valuation / Mispricing
+0
Modestly Cheap
edge √Σ 71 · risk √Σ 71 · conf 6/10
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionShare Count Shrinking
Earnings QualityGood Earnings Quality
The Play — combined read across both lenses Delvantic - Cairn AI

The two lenses are telling a consistent story: Lens 1 at +21 says this is a legitimately strong business — 29% FCF margins, clean accruals, real net share shrinkage at ~3.7% per year — but a stagnating one with uncomfortable leverage. Lens 2 at 0 says the market basically knows this, and the ~15% gap to a high-$30s deserved value is the minimum acceptable discount, not a gift. I'm not going to pretend a 15% margin of safety on a no-growth, levered consumer internet name is a pound-the-table setup. It isn't.

So here's the play: I open a starter position around 1/3 of target weight here at $34.57 — I'm getting paid a real FCF yield, buybacks are accretive at this price, and the earnings quality lets me sleep. I add a second tranche at $30 and back up the truck to full weight at $27, which is roughly the EPV floor and where the bear case (Tinder bleed continues, Hinge decelerates) is finally priced in. I do NOT chase above $38 — the signal-adjusted FV is ~$40 and I'm not paying near fair for 0.4% revenue growth. What flips me aggressive earlier: a quarter showing Tinger payer stabilization or Hinge re-accelerating — that re-rates the quality score and the whole thesis. What gets me out: net debt creeping up while FCF falls below $900M, because then the leverage stops being academic. Target sizing at full conviction: ~3% position. Today: ~1%.

The evidence behind each score — switch lenses
+21 Strong edge √Σ 123 · risk √Σ 102 · conf 7/10

Match runs a genuinely high-quality P&L: gross margins held at 72.8% in 2025, operating margins at 25%, and FCF grew from $832M (2021) to $1.02B (2025). Earnings quality looks clean — OCF/NI of 1.91x, negative accruals (-8.2% of assets), and a Beneish M-score of -3.09 all point to real, cash-backed earnings rather than accounting sugar. The company is a net buyer of its stock (diluted share count fell from 304.8M to 262.5M, a -3.7% CAGR), with buybacks running 2.3x SBC — per-share value is being concentrated.

The drag is twofold. First, growth has flatlined: revenue went from $3.36B (2023) to $3.49B (2025), essentially zero growth over two years in what should be a scaled consumer internet franchise — a warning on the durability of the core dating moat (Tinder fatigue is the obvious suspect, though that needs filing-level confirmation). Second, the balance sheet carries net debt of -$2.94B against $1.03B cash, and Altman Z of 0.69 sits in distress territory — for an asset-light business that's largely a function of leveraged-buyback financial engineering rather than imminent solvency risk, but it means there's no cushion if FCF wobbles. Insider activity is routine vesting/withholding, no signal.

Net: high-quality earnings and capital return discipline, mediocre growth, levered capital structure. A solid business, not a fortress.

Strengths 3
m80
Elite margin and cash conversion profile
72.8% gross margin, 25% operating margin, and $1.02B FCF on $3.49B revenue (29% FCF margin) in 2025. OCF/NI of 1.91x confirms earnings convert to cash.
m75
Aggressive per-share value concentration
Diluted shares fell from 304.8M (2021) to 262.5M (2025), a -3.7% CAGR. Buyback/SBC ratio of 232% means the company is a true net repurchaser, not just neutralizing dilution.
m55
Clean earnings quality signals
Accruals at -8.2% of assets, Beneish M of -3.09 (well below the -1.78 manipulation threshold), and OCF/NI of 1.91x are all consistent with conservative reporting.
Concerns 4
m70
Revenue growth has effectively stalled
Revenue progression: $3.36B (2023) → $3.48B (2024) → $3.49B (2025). ~0.4% YoY in 2025 is a serious durability question mark for a consumer internet franchise and hints at Tinder maturity/decay.
m60
Levered balance sheet, no cushion
Net debt of $2.94B against $1.03B cash; Altman Z of 0.69 in distress zone. FCF easily services it today, but there's no margin for error if the core franchise deteriorates.
m35
Operating margin volatility
Op margin swung 28.5% (2021) → 16.2% (2022) → 27.3% (2023) → 23.7% (2024) → 25% (2025). Not a smooth compounder profile; suggests sensitivity to marketing spend or impairments.
m25
Net income lumpiness
Net income $651M (2023) → $551M (2024) → $613M (2025). Bottom line not growing despite buybacks, suggesting EPS growth is mostly mechanical from share count, not earnings power.
This is a solid business, not a great one. The cash generation and buyback discipline are real and the earnings are clean — I have no integrity concerns. But a consumer internet franchise growing 0.4% with a levered balance sheet is not a fortress; it's a mature cash cow that's quietly running out of organic growth and using buybacks to manufacture per-share progress. If Tinder's user base keeps eroding, the FCF that makes the leverage palatable starts to look fragile. I'd grade it Strong on quality of operations and capital return, downgraded from Fortress by the growth stall and the net debt position.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Tinder vs Hinge vs other-brand revenue/paying-user trends — is Hinge offsetting Tinder decline, or is the whole portfolio plateauing?
  • Debt maturity schedule and interest coverage — confirm $2.94B net debt is term-loan/notes with comfortable maturity ladder
  • Reason for 2022 operating margin compression to 16.2% (impairment? marketing reset?) to judge whether it could recur
  • Customer/payer concentration and ARPU trends by brand
  • Activist/Elliott involvement and any commitments around capital return or strategic review
+0 Modestly Cheap edge √Σ 71 · risk √Σ 71 · conf 6/10
Price $34.57 vs deserved ~$40, roughly 15% margin of safety — modestly cheap, not a fat pitch. attractive below $30.00

The e2e composite FV of $45 and signal-adjusted FV of $40.57 bracket a deserved value somewhere in the high-$30s to low-$40s for a strong-but-stagnating cash machine. The DCF at $53.83 looks generous given 0.4% revenue growth and saturation risk in core Tinder — I'd discount that toward the EPV floor of $27.36, which itself is too punitive for a business throwing off this much FCF. Splitting the difference and crediting the clean earnings quality, I land on deserved value around $38-42, versus the $34.57 print.

That's a ~10-20% gap — enough to call it modestly cheap, not enough to call it a steal. What's priced in: the market clearly believes Tinder is structurally challenged and that buybacks alone won't carry the equity. What has to go right to justify higher: Hinge needs to keep scaling, Tinder needs to stop bleeding payers, and leverage needs to not become a story. None of that is heroic, but none is guaranteed either. For a leveraged, low-growth consumer internet asset, a 15-20% discount to fair is the minimum I'd want — we're right at that threshold.

Cheap signals 2
m55
Trades below signal-adjusted FV
$34.57 vs signal-adjusted FV $40.57 = ~17% upside to fair. Real gap, but not the 30%+ I'd want for a stagnating top line.
m45
FCF yield supports the floor
At an $8B market cap on a high-margin cash machine with disciplined buybacks, the per-share math compounds even if revenue is flat. Buybacks at this price are accretive.
Rich / priced-in 3
m50
DCF of $53.83 looks runaway
A $53.83 DCF on a business growing 0.4% requires terminal assumptions I don't trust. The composite FV is being pulled up by an optimistic DCF — I'd lean closer to the signal-adjusted $40.57 or lower.
m40
Bear case isn't fully priced
If Tinder payers keep eroding and Hinge growth decelerates, deserved value drifts toward the EPV floor of $27.36. The current price doesn't fully reflect that tail.
m30
Leverage caps the multiple
Levered balance sheet on a no-growth consumer internet name means the market is right to demand a discount to peer multiples. Some of the apparent 'cheapness' is just appropriate risk pricing.
It's modestly cheap, not a screaming buy. The signal-adjusted $40-ish FV against a $34.57 price gives me ~15-17% upside, which for a leveraged, no-growth cash cow is roughly the minimum I need. The DCF at $53 is doing too much work; I trust the signal-adjusted number more. I'd start nibbling here but I'd really want it sub-$30 to back up the truck — at that point the FCF yield and buyback math do the heavy lifting regardless of Tinder's story.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Tinder payer count trajectory in latest quarter — stabilization vs continued decline
  • Hinge revenue growth and contribution margin
  • Net leverage and refinancing schedule on the debt stack
  • Buyback pace and whether management is leaning in at current prices
  • Forward guidance on total revenue growth and margin
Two lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality is price-agnostic; Valuation is price-conditional. The scores are not blended (yet). Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for MTCH. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
Data via Financial Modeling Prep · Cached for performance · fmp
v1.1.330 · 344c2a54 · 2026-06-09 20:20:16