Chemicals - Specialty
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
AVNT vs KWR vs CBT vs FUL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
AVNT vs KWR vs CBT vs FUL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $3.35B | $2.48B | $4.24B | $3.29B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.28B | $1.93B | $3.58B | $3.47B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $158M | $4M | $285M | $152M |
| Gross Margin | 31.7% | 34.4% | 24.8% | 31.5% |
| Operating Margin | 9.3% | 3.7% | 15.7% | 10.9% |
| Forward P/E | 12.0x | 19.3x | 13.0x | 12.9x |
| Total Debt | $1.92B | $929M | $1.22B | $2.02B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $511M | $180M | $258M | $107M |
AVNT vs KWR vs CBT vs FUL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avient Corporation (AVNT) | 100 | 147.3 | +47.3% |
| Quaker Chemical Cor… (KWR) | 100 | 83.7 | -16.3% |
| Cabot Corporation (CBT) | 100 | 227.5 | +127.5% |
| H.B. Fuller Company (FUL) | 100 | 161.3 | +61.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AVNT vs KWR vs CBT vs FUL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AVNT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 1.19, yield 2.9%
- Beta 1.19, yield 2.9%, current ratio 1.66x
- Lower P/E (12.0x vs 12.9x)
- 2.9% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs FUL's 1.5%
KWR is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 2.7%, EPS growth -102.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -1.0%
- 2.7% revenue growth vs CBT's -7.0%
- +45.1% vs AVNT's +4.1%
CBT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 115.7% 10Y total return vs FUL's 54.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.78, Low D/E 71.3%, current ratio 1.61x
- 8.0% margin vs KWR's 0.2%
- Beta 0.78 vs KWR's 1.35
FUL lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 2.7% revenue growth vs CBT's -7.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.0x vs 12.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.0% margin vs KWR's 0.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.78 vs KWR's 1.35 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs FUL's 1.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +45.1% vs AVNT's +4.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.4% ROA vs KWR's 0.2%, ROIC 17.4% vs 6.6% |
AVNT vs KWR vs CBT vs FUL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
AVNT vs KWR vs CBT vs FUL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CBT leads in 4 of 6 categories
AVNT leads 0 • KWR leads 0 • FUL leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CBT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CBT is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.6B annually — 1.9x KWR's $1.9B. CBT is the more profitable business, keeping 8.0% 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 | $3.3B | $1.9B | $3.6B | $3.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $445M | $143M | $731M | $472M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $158M | $4M | $285M | $152M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $205M | $143M | $459M | $121M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +31.7% | +34.4% | +24.8% | +31.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.3% | +3.7% | +15.7% | +10.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.8% | +0.2% | +8.0% | +4.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +6.3% | +7.4% | +12.8% | +3.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.5% | +8.5% | -3.4% | -3.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.8% | +54.8% | -23.1% | +122.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — AVNT and CBT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.5x trailing earnings, CBT trades at a 67% valuation discount to AVNT's 41.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CBT's 6.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than AVNT's 12.2x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.3B | $2.5B | $4.2B | $3.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.8B | $3.2B | $5.2B | $5.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 41.01x | -1021.00x | 13.50x | 22.06x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.95x | 19.32x | 13.04x | 12.87x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 7.10x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.22x | 11.93x | 6.71x | 9.00x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.03x | 1.31x | 1.14x | 0.95x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.40x | 1.81x | 2.58x | 1.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 17.16x | 30.74x | 10.86x | 27.11x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CBT leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CBT delivers a 16.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $0 for KWR. KWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.67x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FUL's 1.01x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FUL scores 7/9 vs KWR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.6% | +0.3% | +16.8% | +7.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.6% | +0.2% | +7.4% | +2.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.9% | +6.6% | +17.4% | +7.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.0% | +7.6% | +21.3% | +9.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.81x | 0.67x | 0.71x | 1.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.4B | $749M | $957M | $1.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $511M | $180M | $258M | $107M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.9B | $929M | $1.2B | $2.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.61x | 1.41x | 14.72x | 2.62x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CBT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CBT five years ago would be worth $14,321 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,267 for KWR. Over the past 12 months, KWR leads with a +45.1% total return vs AVNT's +4.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CBT at 7.0% vs KWR's -11.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +16.0% | +3.6% | +21.9% | +1.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +4.1% | +45.1% | +13.8% | +16.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.3% | -30.1% | +22.5% | -4.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -22.7% | -37.3% | +43.2% | -6.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +27.8% | +88.7% | +115.7% | +54.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.8% | -11.2% | +7.0% | -1.5% |
Risk & Volatility
CBT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CBT is the less volatile stock with a 0.78 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. CBT currently trades 96.1% from its 52-week high vs KWR's 78.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.19x | 1.35x | 0.78x | 1.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $44.85 | $183.00 | $84.60 | $68.63 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $27.48 | $99.18 | $58.33 | $48.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +81.4% | +78.1% | +96.1% | +88.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.2 | 58.2 | 71.7 | 49.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 620K | 176K | 374K | 569K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — AVNT and FUL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AVNT as "Buy", KWR as "Buy", CBT as "Buy", FUL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 32.6% upside for AVNT (target: $48) vs -4.0% for CBT (target: $78). For income investors, AVNT offers the higher dividend yield at 2.95% vs KWR's 1.38%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $48.40 | $176.33 | $78.00 | $73.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 20 | 14 | 15 | 15 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.9% | +1.4% | +2.2% | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 14 | 6 | 4 | 23 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.08 | $1.97 | $1.77 | $0.91 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +1.7% | +4.0% | +1.8% |
CBT leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 2 categories are tied.
AVNT vs KWR vs CBT vs FUL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR) is the stronger pick with 2.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 0% for Cabot Corporation (CBT). Cabot Corporation (CBT) offers the better valuation at 13. 5x trailing P/E (13. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Avient Corporation (AVNT) a "Buy" — based on 20 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 — AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL?
On trailing P/E, Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the cheapest at 13.
5x versus Avient Corporation at 41. 0x. On forward P/E, Avient Corporation is actually cheaper at 12. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL?
Over the past 5 years, Cabot Corporation (CBT) delivered a total return of +43.
2%, compared to -37. 3% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CBT returned +115. 7% versus AVNT's +27. 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 — AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
78β versus Quaker Chemical Corporation's 1. 35β — meaning KWR is approximately 72% more volatile than CBT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 67% versus 101% for H. B. Fuller Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR) is pulling ahead at 2.
7% versus -7. 0% for Cabot Corporation (CBT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: H. B. Fuller Company grew EPS 19. 6% year-over-year, compared to -102. 2% for Quaker Chemical Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, KWR leads at -1. 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 — AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL?
Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
9% net margin versus -0. 1% for Quaker Chemical Corporation — meaning it keeps 8. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CBT leads at 16. 7% versus 6. 2% for AVNT. 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 AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Avient Corporation (AVNT) trades at 12.
0x forward P/E versus 19. 3x for Quaker Chemical Corporation — 7. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AVNT: 32. 6% to $48. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Avient Corporation (AVNT) offers the highest yield at 2. 9%, versus 1. 4% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR).
09Is AVNT or KWR or CBT or FUL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
78), 2. 2% yield, +115. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CBT: +115. 7%, KWR: +88. 7%), 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 AVNT and KWR and CBT and FUL?
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: AVNT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; KWR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CBT is a small-cap deep-value stock; FUL is a small-cap quality compounder stock. 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.