Chemicals - Specialty
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
SQM vs ALB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
SQM vs ALB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $13.35B | $22.70B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.33B | $5.49B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $524M | $-275M |
| Gross Margin | 27.7% | 18.5% |
| Operating Margin | 21.1% | 5.6% |
| Forward P/E | 15.3x | 21.7x |
| Total Debt | $4.82B | $3.30B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.38B | $1.62B |
SQM vs ALB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sociedad Química y … (SQM) | 100 | 383.5 | +283.5% |
| Albemarle Corporati… (ALB) | 100 | 251.7 | +151.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SQM vs ALB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SQM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 442.5% 10Y total return vs ALB's 202.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.24, Low D/E 92.7%, current ratio 2.51x
- Beta 1.24, yield 0.3%, current ratio 2.51x
ALB is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 1.60, yield 0.8%
- Rev growth -4.4%, EPS growth 48.7%, 3Y rev CAGR -11.1%
- -4.4% revenue growth vs SQM's -39.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | -4.4% revenue growth vs SQM's -39.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.3x vs 21.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.1% margin vs ALB's -5.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.24 vs ALB's 1.60 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs SQM's 0.3% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +237.9% vs SQM's +176.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.5% ROA vs ALB's -1.7%, ROIC 9.0% vs 0.6% |
SQM vs ALB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SQM vs ALB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SQM leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALB and SQM operate at a comparable scale, with $5.5B and $4.3B in trailing revenue. SQM is the more profitable business, keeping 12.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ALB's -5.0%. On growth, ALB holds the edge at +32.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.3B | $5.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $917M | $802M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $524M | -$275M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $66M | $577M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +27.7% | +18.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +21.1% | +5.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +12.1% | -5.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +1.5% | +10.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.9% | +32.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +34.8% | — |
Valuation Metrics
SQM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, SQM's 15.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ALB's 32.3x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $13.3B | $22.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $16.8B | $24.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -65.82x | -33.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.34x | 21.72x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.68x | 32.31x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.95x | 4.41x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.12x | 2.32x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 44.07x | 32.78x |
Profitability & Efficiency
SQM leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SQM delivers a 9.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $-3 for ALB. ALB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.34x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SQM's 0.93x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ALB scores 6/9 vs SQM's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.5% | -2.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.5% | -1.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.0% | +0.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.4% | +0.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.93x | 0.34x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3.4B | $1.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.4B | $1.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.8B | $3.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.37x | 0.57x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SQM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SQM five years ago would be worth $20,454 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,124 for ALB. Over the past 12 months, ALB leads with a +237.9% total return vs SQM's +176.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SQM at 12.8% vs ALB's 2.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +34.0% | +34.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +176.5% | +237.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +43.4% | +6.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +104.5% | +31.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +442.5% | +202.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +12.8% | +2.0% |
Risk & Volatility
SQM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SQM is the less volatile stock with a 1.24 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ALB's 1.60 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SQM currently trades 97.8% from its 52-week high vs ALB's 89.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.24x | 1.60x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $95.56 | $215.69 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $29.36 | $53.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.8% | +89.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.4 | 54.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.3M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
ALB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates SQM as "Hold" and ALB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply -0.9% upside for ALB (target: $191) vs -19.2% for SQM (target: $76). For income investors, ALB offers the higher dividend yield at 0.84% vs SQM's 0.25%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $75.50 | $190.80 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 16 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.3% | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.24 | $1.62 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
SQM leads in 5 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ALB leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook).
SQM vs ALB: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SQM or ALB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) is the stronger pick with -4.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). Analysts rate Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM) a "Hold" — based on 16 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 is the better long-term investment — SQM or ALB?
Over the past 5 years, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) delivered a total return of +104. 5%, compared to +31. 2% for Albemarle Corporation (ALB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SQM returned +442. 5% versus ALB's +202. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — SQM or ALB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 24β versus Albemarle Corporation's 1. 60β — meaning ALB is approximately 29% more volatile than SQM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 34% versus 93% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — SQM or ALB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Albemarle Corporation (ALB) is pulling ahead at -4.
4% versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Albemarle Corporation grew EPS 48. 7% year-over-year, compared to -120. 1% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SQM leads at 16. 5% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — SQM or ALB?
Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) is the more profitable company, earning -8. 9% net margin versus -9. 9% for Albemarle Corporation — meaning it keeps -8. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SQM leads at 23. 5% versus 1. 8% for ALB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SQM leads at 29. 3%, 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.
06Is SQM or ALB more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) trades at 15. 3x forward P/E versus 21. 7x for Albemarle Corporation — 6. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ALB: -0. 9% to $190. 80.
07Which pays a better dividend — SQM or ALB?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Albemarle Corporation (ALB) offers the highest yield at 0. 8%, versus 0. 3% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM).
08Is SQM or ALB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0.
8% yield, +202. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ALB: +202. 4%, SQM: +442. 5%), 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.
09What are the main differences between SQM and ALB?
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.
ALB pays a dividend while SQM 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.