Chemicals - Specialty
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
HWKN vs IOSP vs KWR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
HWKN vs IOSP vs KWR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $3.47B | $1.92B | $2.46B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.06B | $1.78B | $1.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $82M | $117M | $4M |
| Gross Margin | 22.9% | 27.7% | 34.4% |
| Operating Margin | 11.5% | 8.7% | 3.7% |
| Forward P/E | 42.3x | 15.7x | 19.2x |
| Total Debt | $160M | $90M | $929M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $293M | $180M |
HWKN vs IOSP vs KWR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN) | 100 | 779.1 | +679.1% |
| Innospec Inc. (IOSP) | 100 | 100.8 | +0.8% |
| Quaker Chemical Cor… (KWR) | 100 | 83.0 | -17.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HWKN vs IOSP vs KWR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HWKN has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 6.0%, EPS growth 12.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.0%
- 7.9% 10Y total return vs IOSP's 83.8%
- 6.0% revenue growth vs IOSP's -3.7%
IOSP is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.70, yield 2.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, Low D/E 6.3%, current ratio 2.79x
- PEG 0.49 vs HWKN's 1.71
KWR is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +44.4% vs IOSP's -14.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.0% revenue growth vs IOSP's -3.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.7x vs 19.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 7.8% margin vs KWR's 0.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs KWR's 1.35, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.2% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs HWKN's 0.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +44.4% vs IOSP's -14.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.4% ROA vs KWR's 0.2%, ROIC 15.9% vs 6.6% |
HWKN vs IOSP vs KWR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HWKN vs IOSP vs KWR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HWKN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KWR is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.9B annually — 1.8x HWKN's $1.1B. HWKN is the more profitable business, keeping 7.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KWR's 0.2%. On growth, KWR holds the edge at +8.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.1B | $1.8B | $1.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $172M | $198M | $143M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $82M | $117M | $4M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $88M | $88M | $143M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +22.9% | +27.7% | +34.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.5% | +8.7% | +3.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.8% | +6.6% | +0.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.2% | +4.9% | +7.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.9% | -2.4% | +8.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.2% | +167.7% | +54.8% |
Valuation Metrics
IOSP leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.6x trailing earnings, IOSP trades at a 60% valuation discount to HWKN's 41.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IOSP offers better value at 0.52x vs HWKN's 1.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.5B | $1.9B | $2.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.6B | $1.7B | $3.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 41.47x | 16.63x | -1013.29x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 42.34x | 15.66x | 19.17x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.67x | 0.52x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.75x | 8.37x | 11.86x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.56x | 1.08x | 1.30x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.60x | 1.37x | 1.80x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 49.51x | 21.87x | 30.51x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HWKN leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HWKN delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $0 for KWR. IOSP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KWR's 0.67x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HWKN scores 6/9 vs KWR's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +15.9% | +8.2% | +0.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.4% | +6.4% | +0.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +15.9% | +10.7% | +6.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +19.3% | +11.0% | +7.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.35x | 0.06x | 0.67x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $155M | -$203M | $749M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $293M | $180M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $160M | $90M | $929M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 10.27x | — | 1.41x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HWKN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HWKN five years ago would be worth $49,819 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,377 for KWR. Over the past 12 months, KWR leads with a +44.4% total return vs IOSP's -14.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HWKN at 61.2% vs KWR's -11.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +15.2% | +1.8% | +2.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +40.5% | -14.2% | +44.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +319.1% | -16.3% | -30.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +398.2% | -17.5% | -36.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +790.6% | +83.8% | +81.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +61.2% | -5.8% | -11.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HWKN and IOSP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IOSP is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KWR's 1.35 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HWKN currently trades 89.8% from its 52-week high vs KWR's 77.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.98x | 0.70x | 1.35x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $186.15 | $95.55 | $183.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $115.35 | $65.58 | $99.18 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.8% | +81.3% | +77.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.8 | 61.9 | 56.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 169K | 223K | 178K |
Analyst Outlook
IOSP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HWKN as "Buy", IOSP as "Hold", KWR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 48.1% upside for IOSP (target: $115) vs 24.3% for KWR (target: $176). For income investors, IOSP offers the higher dividend yield at 2.18% vs HWKN's 0.42%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $115.00 | $176.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 9 | 14 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.4% | +2.2% | +1.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 5 | 12 | 6 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.70 | $1.70 | $1.97 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | 0.0% | +1.7% |
HWKN leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). IOSP leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
HWKN vs IOSP vs KWR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HWKN or IOSP or KWR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is the stronger pick with 6. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 7% for Innospec Inc. (IOSP). Innospec Inc. (IOSP) offers the better valuation at 16. 6x trailing P/E (15. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN) a "Buy" — based on 1 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — HWKN or IOSP or KWR?
On trailing P/E, Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the cheapest at 16. 6x versus Hawkins, Inc. at 41. 5x. On forward P/E, Innospec Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Innospec Inc. wins at 0. 49x versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 1. 71x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HWKN or IOSP or KWR?
Over the past 5 years, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) delivered a total return of +398. 2%, compared to -36. 2% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HWKN returned +790. 6% versus KWR's +81. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — HWKN or IOSP or KWR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 70β versus Quaker Chemical Corporation's 1. 35β — meaning KWR is approximately 93% more volatile than IOSP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 67% for Quaker Chemical Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HWKN or IOSP or KWR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is pulling ahead at 6. 0% versus -3. 7% for Innospec Inc. (IOSP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innospec Inc. grew EPS 228. 9% year-over-year, compared to -102. 2% for Quaker Chemical Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, HWKN leads at 8. 0% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — HWKN or IOSP or KWR?
Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 7% net margin versus -0. 1% for Quaker Chemical Corporation — meaning it keeps 8. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HWKN leads at 12. 2% versus 8. 8% for IOSP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KWR leads at 36. 0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is HWKN or IOSP or KWR more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 49x versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 1. 71x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) trades at 15. 7x forward P/E versus 42. 3x for Hawkins, Inc. — 26. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IOSP: 48. 1% to $115. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — HWKN or IOSP or KWR?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Innospec Inc. (IOSP) offers the highest yield at 2. 2%, versus 0. 4% for Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN).
09Is HWKN or IOSP or KWR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 70), 2. 2% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IOSP: +83. 8%, KWR: +81. 8%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between HWKN and IOSP and KWR?
Both stocks operate in the Basic Materials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: HWKN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IOSP is a small-cap deep-value stock; KWR is a small-cap quality compounder stock. IOSP, KWR pay a dividend while HWKN does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.