Chemicals - Specialty
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ALB vs LAC vs SQM vs MP vs FCX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial Materials
Chemicals - Specialty
Industrial Materials
Copper
ALB vs LAC vs SQM vs MP vs FCX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Industrial Materials | Chemicals - Specialty | Industrial Materials | Copper |
| Market Cap | $23.37B | $1.37B | $13.08B | $12.28B | $87.11B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $5.49B | $0.00 | $4.33B | $305M | $26.42B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-233M | $-241M | $524M | $-71M | $2.73B |
| Gross Margin | 18.5% | — | 27.7% | 8.3% | 27.8% |
| Operating Margin | 5.6% | — | 21.1% | -36.4% | 27.8% |
| Forward P/E | 22.4x | — | 15.0x | 274.3x | 22.4x |
| Total Debt | $3.30B | $23M | $4.82B | $1.04B | $11.50B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.62B | $594M | $1.38B | $1.17B | $3.35B |
ALB vs LAC vs SQM vs MP vs FCX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Albemarle Corporati… (ALB) | 100 | 256.9 | +156.9% |
| Lithium Americas Co… (LAC) | 100 | 180.3 | +80.3% |
| Sociedad Química y … (SQM) | 100 | 351.4 | +251.4% |
| MP Materials Corp. (MP) | 100 | 693.4 | +593.4% |
| Freeport-McMoRan In… (FCX) | 100 | 523.9 | +423.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ALB vs LAC vs SQM vs MP vs FCX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ALB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 1.60, yield 0.8%
- +256.7% vs FCX's +65.3%
LAC is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.42, Low D/E 2.4%, current ratio 10.33x
SQM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for defensive.
- Beta 1.24, yield 0.3%, current ratio 2.51x
- Lower P/E (15.0x vs 22.4x)
- 12.1% margin vs MP's -23.3%
- Beta 1.24 vs FCX's 1.79
MP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 5.9% 10Y total return vs FCX's 5.1%
- 35.1% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0%
FCX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 1.1%, EPS growth 16.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.3%
- 1.0% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs ALB's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- 4.7% ROA vs LAC's -16.6%, ROIC 12.8% vs -7.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.1% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.0x vs 22.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.1% margin vs MP's -23.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.24 vs FCX's 1.79 | |
| Dividends | 1.0% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs ALB's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +256.7% vs FCX's +65.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.7% ROA vs LAC's -16.6%, ROIC 12.8% vs -7.1% |
ALB vs LAC vs SQM vs MP vs FCX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ALB vs LAC vs SQM vs MP vs FCX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FCX leads in 2 of 6 categories
SQM leads 2 • MP leads 1 • ALB leads 0 • LAC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FCX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FCX and LAC operate at a comparable scale, with $26.4B and $0 in trailing revenue. SQM is the more profitable business, keeping 12.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MP's -23.3%. On growth, MP holds the edge at +49.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $5.5B | $0 | $4.3B | $305M | $26.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $802M | -$32M | $917M | -$43M | $9.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$233M | -$241M | $524M | -$71M | $2.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $577M | -$648M | $66M | -$314M | $6.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +18.5% | — | +27.7% | +8.3% | +27.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.6% | — | +21.1% | -36.4% | +27.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.2% | — | +12.1% | -23.3% | +10.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +10.5% | — | +1.5% | -102.8% | +23.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +32.7% | — | +8.9% | +49.1% | +12.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -21.4% | +34.8% | +121.4% | +154.2% |
Valuation Metrics
SQM leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, FCX's 11.2x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ALB's 33.2x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $23.4B | $1.4B | $13.1B | $12.3B | $87.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $25.1B | $801M | $16.5B | $12.2B | $95.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -34.50x | -26.95x | -64.51x | -138.26x | 39.88x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 22.36x | — | 15.04x | 274.33x | 22.41x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 1.33x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 33.21x | — | 15.43x | — | 11.16x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.55x | — | 2.89x | 44.59x | 3.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.39x | 1.20x | 5.02x | 4.92x | 2.84x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 33.76x | — | 43.19x | — | 78.05x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FCX leads this category, winning 4 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 $-27 for LAC. LAC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x 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 LAC's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.3% | -26.9% | +9.5% | -3.7% | +8.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.4% | -16.6% | +4.5% | -2.0% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +0.6% | -7.1% | +9.0% | -4.7% | +12.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.6% | -3.9% | +11.4% | -4.2% | +12.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.34x | 0.02x | 0.93x | 0.44x | 0.37x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.7B | -$571M | $3.4B | -$123M | $8.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.6B | $594M | $1.4B | $1.2B | $3.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3.3B | $23M | $4.8B | $1.0B | $11.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.59x | — | 5.37x | -2.80x | 17.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MP five years ago would be worth $24,966 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,869 for LAC. Over the past 12 months, ALB leads with a +256.7% total return vs FCX's +65.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MP at 47.6% vs LAC's -23.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +38.1% | +18.7% | +31.4% | +25.8% | +17.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +256.7% | +84.4% | +173.2% | +192.7% | +65.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.3% | -55.6% | +40.7% | +221.7% | +70.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +26.8% | -31.3% | +94.2% | +149.7% | +44.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +217.0% | +234.9% | +464.6% | +591.3% | +507.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +3.0% | -23.7% | +12.0% | +47.6% | +19.5% |
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 FCX's 1.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SQM currently trades 93.5% from its 52-week high vs LAC's 53.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.60x | 1.42x | 1.24x | 1.40x | 1.79x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $221.00 | $10.52 | $98.00 | $100.25 | $70.97 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $53.70 | $2.47 | $29.36 | $18.64 | $35.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.8% | +53.8% | +93.5% | +69.0% | +85.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.0 | 69.1 | 61.5 | 66.8 | 49.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.0M | 9.0M | 1.3M | 5.6M | 15.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ALB and FCX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ALB as "Hold", LAC as "Hold", SQM as "Hold", MP as "Buy", FCX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 23.7% upside for LAC (target: $7) vs -17.6% for SQM (target: $76). For income investors, FCX offers the higher dividend yield at 0.99% vs SQM's 0.26%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $190.80 | $7.00 | $75.50 | $78.25 | $67.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 45 | 15 | 16 | 11 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.8% | — | +0.3% | — | +1.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 15 | — | 0 | — | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.62 | — | $0.24 | — | $0.60 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% |
FCX leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). SQM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
ALB vs LAC vs SQM vs MP vs FCX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is the stronger pick with 35. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX) offers the better valuation at 39. 9x trailing P/E (22. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MP Materials Corp. (MP) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX?
On forward P/E, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. is actually cheaper at 15. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX?
Over the past 5 years, MP Materials Corp.
(MP) delivered a total return of +149. 7%, compared to -31. 3% for Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MP returned +591. 3% versus ALB's +217. 0%. 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 — ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX?
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 Freeport-McMoRan Inc. 's 1. 79β — meaning FCX is approximately 45% more volatile than SQM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 93% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is pulling ahead at 35. 1% 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 -757. 1% for Lithium Americas Corp.. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX?
Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 6% net margin versus -31. 2% for MP Materials Corp. — meaning it keeps 8. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FCX leads at 24. 4% versus -44. 6% for MP. 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.
07Is ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) trades at 15. 0x forward P/E versus 274. 3x for MP Materials Corp. — 259. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAC: 23. 7% to $7. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX?
In this comparison, FCX (1.
0% yield), ALB (0. 8% yield), SQM (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. LAC, MP do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ALB or LAC or SQM or MP or FCX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1. 0% yield, +507. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FCX: +507. 7%, LAC: +234. 9%), 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 ALB and LAC and SQM and MP and FCX?
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: ALB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; LAC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SQM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MP is a mid-cap high-growth stock; FCX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ALB, FCX pay a dividend while LAC, SQM, MP 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.
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.