Steel
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
ACNT vs TRS vs JPM vs KO vs ESAB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Packaging & Containers
Banks - Diversified
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Manufacturing - Metal Fabrication
ACNT vs TRS vs JPM vs KO vs ESAB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Steel | Packaging & Containers | Banks - Diversified | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Manufacturing - Metal Fabrication |
| Market Cap | $127M | $1.56B | $896.00B | $355.61B | $5.57B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $77M | $868M | $280.33B | $49.28B | $2.91B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1M | $909M | $57.05B | $13.70B | $207M |
| Gross Margin | 21.8% | 22.8% | 60.0% | 61.7% | 35.4% |
| Operating Margin | -9.8% | 6.2% | 25.9% | 29.3% | 16.6% |
| Forward P/E | 16.9x | 24.7x | 14.4x | 25.3x | 15.8x |
| Total Debt | $13M | $505M | $942.38B | $45.49B | $1.43B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $58M | $30M | $343.34B | $10.27B | $186M |
ACNT vs TRS vs JPM vs KO vs ESAB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 22 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ascent Industries C… (ACNT) | 100 | 87.5 | -12.5% |
| TriMas Corporation (TRS) | 100 | 128.8 | +28.8% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 235.3 | +135.3% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 133.3 | +33.3% |
| ESAB Corporation (ESAB) | 100 | 183.1 | +83.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ACNT vs TRS vs JPM vs KO vs ESAB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ACNT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.47, Low D/E 15.3%, current ratio 6.72x
- Beta 0.47, current ratio 6.72x
- Beta 0.47 vs ESAB's 1.41, lower leverage
TRS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and momentum.
- 104.7% margin vs ACNT's 1.6%
- +51.7% vs ESAB's -26.5%
- 54.6% ROA vs ACNT's 1.1%, ROIC 0.9% vs -6.6%
JPM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs TRS's 151.7%
- PEG 0.81 vs KO's 2.26
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 15.8x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.18
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
ESAB is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 3.7%, EPS growth -13.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.1%
- 3.7% revenue growth vs ACNT's -57.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.7% revenue growth vs ACNT's -57.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 15.8x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.18 | |
| Quality / Margins | 104.7% margin vs ACNT's 1.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.47 vs ESAB's 1.41, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +51.7% vs ESAB's -26.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 54.6% ROA vs ACNT's 1.1%, ROIC 0.9% vs -6.6% |
ACNT vs TRS vs JPM vs KO vs ESAB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ACNT vs TRS vs JPM vs KO vs ESAB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 4 of 6 categories
JPM leads 1 • ACNT leads 0 • TRS leads 0 • ESAB leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 3663.4x ACNT's $77M. TRS is the more profitable business, keeping 104.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ACNT's 1.6%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $77M | $868M | $280.3B | $49.3B | $2.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$3M | $112M | $81.4B | $15.5B | $585M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1M | $909M | $57.0B | $13.7B | $207M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$7M | $48M | $100.9B | $12.6B | $218M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.8% | +22.8% | +60.0% | +61.7% | +35.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.8% | +6.2% | +25.9% | +29.3% | +16.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.6% | +104.7% | +20.4% | +27.8% | +7.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -9.0% | +5.6% | +36.0% | +25.5% | +7.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.9% | -30.4% | — | +12.1% | +9.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.7% | +70.3% | +16.0% | +18.2% | -29.1% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — ACNT and JPM each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.0x trailing earnings, TRS trades at a 48% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs ESAB's 3.39x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $127M | $1.6B | $896.0B | $355.6B | $5.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $83M | $2.0B | $1.50T | $390.8B | $6.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -24.22x | 14.01x | 16.00x | 27.18x | 24.62x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.93x | 24.70x | 14.40x | 25.27x | 15.85x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.90x | 2.43x | 3.39x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 28.57x | 18.36x | 26.39x | 11.85x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.69x | 2.41x | 3.20x | 7.42x | 1.96x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.56x | 2.39x | 2.47x | 10.40x | 2.52x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 22.52x | 8.88x | 67.15x | 26.14x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TRS delivers a 101.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $101 in annual profit, vs $1 for ACNT. ACNT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.15x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs ESAB's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +1.4% | +101.1% | +15.9% | +41.1% | +9.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.1% | +54.6% | +1.3% | +13.1% | +4.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -6.6% | +0.9% | +4.5% | +15.8% | +11.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -6.0% | +1.1% | +8.9% | +17.3% | +13.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.15x | 0.72x | 2.60x | 1.33x | 0.65x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$44M | $475M | $599.0B | $35.2B | $1.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $58M | $30M | $343.3B | $10.3B | $186M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $13M | $505M | $942.4B | $45.5B | $1.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 2.87x | 0.74x | 10.70x | 4.54x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,545 for ACNT. Over the past 12 months, TRS leads with a +51.7% total return vs ESAB's -26.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs ACNT's 12.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -12.5% | +14.1% | -0.5% | +20.3% | -18.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +10.2% | +51.7% | +21.8% | +17.2% | -26.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +41.3% | +52.0% | +138.2% | +47.0% | +43.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +25.4% | +33.0% | +118.2% | +65.6% | +85.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.7% | +151.7% | +465.8% | +121.1% | +85.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +12.2% | +15.0% | +33.6% | +13.7% | +12.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ESAB's 1.41 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs ESAB's 66.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.47x | 1.09x | 0.94x | -0.20x | 1.41x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $17.92 | $43.72 | $337.25 | $84.04 | $137.42 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.62 | $26.16 | $262.71 | $65.35 | $82.19 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +78.4% | +94.5% | +95.1% | +98.3% | +66.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.9 | 57.8 | 59.1 | 60.6 | 45.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 73K | 400K | 7.0M | 12.7M | 570K |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ACNT as "Buy", TRS as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", KO as "Buy", ESAB as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 54.0% upside for ESAB (target: $141) vs -8.0% for TRS (target: $38). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.46% vs TRS's 0.39%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $18.00 | $38.00 | $339.75 | $86.13 | $141.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 14 | 61 | 48 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.4% | +1.9% | +2.5% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 15 | 56 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.16 | $5.95 | $2.04 | $0.36 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +7.2% | +6.6% | +3.9% | +0.2% | 0.0% |
KO leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). JPM leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
ACNT vs TRS vs JPM vs KO vs ESAB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ESAB Corporation (ESAB) is the stronger pick with 3.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -57. 9% for Ascent Industries Co. (ACNT). TriMas Corporation (TRS) offers the better valuation at 14. 0x trailing P/E (24. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ascent Industries Co. (ACNT) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB?
On trailing P/E, TriMas Corporation (TRS) is the cheapest at 14.
0x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to +25. 4% for Ascent Industries Co. (ACNT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus ESAB's +85. 5%. 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 — ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus ESAB Corporation's 1. 41β — meaning ESAB is approximately -806% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Ascent Industries Co. (ACNT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 15% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ESAB Corporation (ESAB) is pulling ahead at 3.
7% versus -57. 9% for Ascent Industries Co. (ACNT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: TriMas Corporation grew EPS 400. 0% year-over-year, compared to -13. 7% for ESAB Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, KO leads at 3. 7% 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 — ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -7. 5% for Ascent Industries Co. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus -9. 0% for ACNT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KO leads at 61. 6%, 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 ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 10. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ESAB: 54. 0% to $141. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield), ESAB (0. 4% yield), TRS (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. ACNT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ACNT or TRS or JPM or KO or ESAB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, ESAB: +85. 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.
10What are the main differences between ACNT and TRS and JPM and KO and ESAB?
These companies operate in different sectors (ACNT (Basic Materials) and TRS (Consumer Cyclical) and JPM (Financial Services) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and ESAB (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ACNT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TRS is a small-cap deep-value stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; ESAB is a small-cap quality compounder stock. JPM, KO pay a dividend while ACNT, TRS, ESAB do 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.