BackLearning Tree International Overview

Learning Tree International Total Liabilities

Learning Tree International's total liabilities is $37M.

Get informed when a big investor buys or sells

+ Follow
Total Liabilities
$36.56M
3.99% YoYΔ $-1.52M vs prior year quarter

Peer average

Loading

Learning Tree International Total Liabilities History

Loading

Learning Tree International vs. peers: Total Liabilities Comparison

Loading

Learning Tree International Total Liabilities Growth (YoY per quarter)

Latest change versus the prior comparable period (same company).

Loading

Learning Tree International (LTRE) FAQ

Learning Tree International posts a total liabilities of $37M as of September 2018. That compares with $38M in the prior-year period — down 4.0% year over year. Comparing that reading with peers and prior periods is usually more useful than looking at the number in isolation.

In the prior comparable period, Learning Tree International's total liabilities was $38M. The latest reading is $37M — a 4.0% year-over-year decrease (period ending September 2018). Use the history and growth charts on this page for a longer lookback.

Total Liabilities is one piece of Learning Tree International's financial statement story. At $37M, it should be interpreted next to related metrics — for example revenue with costs, assets with liabilities, or income with margins. Stockcircle links those related pages so you can move from this number to the surrounding context quickly.

Context for LTRE's total liabilities usually means three checks: (1) trend versus prior periods, (2) level versus peers, and (3) consistency with growth and profitability. This page covers the first two; Learning Tree International's other metric pages and overview cover the third.

Judging Learning Tree International against Consumer Discretionary peers is usually better than using a market-wide rule of thumb. Business models inside Consumer Discretionary are more comparable, which makes gaps in total liabilities easier to interpret. Start with $37M here, then scan peer and history charts to see if the gap is persistent.