Chemicals
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CE vs EMN vs HUN vs AVNT vs ASH
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
CE vs EMN vs HUN vs AVNT vs ASH — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $6.95B | $8.66B | $2.63B | $3.47B | $2.50B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $9.49B | $8.64B | $5.69B | $3.26B | $1.81B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1.02B | $399M | $-324M | $82M | $-706M |
| Gross Margin | 20.1% | 19.8% | 12.9% | 31.7% | 28.6% |
| Operating Margin | -7.4% | 9.4% | -1.0% | 6.4% | -33.9% |
| Forward P/E | 11.1x | 12.8x | — | 12.4x | 14.5x |
| Total Debt | $12.93B | $5.08B | $2.73B | $1.92B | $1.57B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.26B | $566M | $429M | $511M | $215M |
CE vs EMN vs HUN vs AVNT vs ASH — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Celanese Corporation (CE) | 100 | 69.1 | -30.9% |
| Eastman Chemical Co… (EMN) | 100 | 111.3 | +11.3% |
| Huntsman Corporation (HUN) | 100 | 83.2 | -16.8% |
| Avient Corporation (AVNT) | 100 | 152.7 | +52.7% |
| Ashland Inc. (ASH) | 100 | 81.3 | -18.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CE vs EMN vs HUN vs AVNT vs ASH
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CE has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and stability.
- Lower P/E (11.1x vs 14.5x)
- Beta 1.11 vs HUN's 1.73
EMN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 36.1% 10Y total return vs HUN's 50.8%
- 4.6% margin vs ASH's -39.0%
- 2.6% ROA vs ASH's -15.5%, ROIC 6.7% vs -15.9%
HUN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for dividends and momentum.
- 5.6% yield, vs AVNT's 2.8%
- +38.4% vs EMN's +3.9%
AVNT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 1.19, yield 2.8%
- Rev growth 0.6%, EPS growth -51.6%, 3Y rev CAGR -1.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.19, Low D/E 80.6%, current ratio 1.66x
- 0.6% revenue growth vs ASH's -13.7%
ASH is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 1.29, yield 3.0%, current ratio 2.85x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 0.6% revenue growth vs ASH's -13.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.1x vs 14.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 4.6% margin vs ASH's -39.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.11 vs HUN's 1.73 | |
| Dividends | 5.6% yield, vs AVNT's 2.8% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +38.4% vs EMN's +3.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.6% ROA vs ASH's -15.5%, ROIC 6.7% vs -15.9% |
CE vs EMN vs HUN vs AVNT vs ASH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CE vs EMN vs HUN vs AVNT vs ASH — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HUN leads in 2 of 6 categories
EMN leads 1 • CE leads 0 • AVNT leads 0 • ASH leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — EMN and AVNT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CE is the larger business by revenue, generating $9.5B annually — 5.2x ASH's $1.8B. EMN is the more profitable business, keeping 4.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ASH's -39.0%. On growth, AVNT holds the edge at +1.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $9.5B | $8.6B | $5.7B | $3.3B | $1.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $58M | $1.2B | $160M | $395M | -$430M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1.0B | $399M | -$324M | $82M | -$706M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $944M | $498M | $135M | $195M | $343M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +20.1% | +19.8% | +12.9% | +31.7% | +28.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -7.4% | +9.4% | -1.0% | +6.4% | -33.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -10.8% | +4.6% | -5.7% | +2.5% | -39.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.9% | +5.8% | +2.4% | +6.0% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.2% | -4.9% | +0.7% | +1.9% | +0.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.1% | -40.8% | -3.3% | -65.4% | -46.2% |
Valuation Metrics
HUN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 18.5x trailing earnings, EMN trades at a 57% valuation discount to AVNT's 42.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, EMN's 9.1x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HUN's 19.9x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $7.0B | $8.7B | $2.6B | $3.5B | $2.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $18.6B | $13.2B | $4.9B | $4.9B | $3.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -5.84x | 18.47x | -9.50x | 42.52x | -2.97x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.12x | 12.85x | — | 12.39x | 14.51x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 5.75x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.33x | 9.12x | 19.89x | 12.54x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.73x | 0.99x | 0.46x | 1.06x | 1.37x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.52x | 1.45x | 0.88x | 1.46x | 1.32x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.66x | 20.43x | 22.65x | 17.80x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
EMN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
EMN delivers a 6.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $7 in annual profit, vs $-38 for ASH. AVNT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.81x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CE's 2.89x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ASH scores 6/9 vs HUN's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -21.5% | +6.7% | -8.1% | +3.5% | -37.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -4.6% | +2.6% | -4.6% | +1.4% | -15.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.4% | +6.7% | -0.6% | +3.9% | -15.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.1% | +7.5% | -0.7% | +4.0% | -16.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.89x | 0.84x | 0.92x | 0.81x | 0.83x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $11.7B | $4.5B | $2.3B | $1.4B | $1.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.3B | $566M | $429M | $511M | $215M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $12.9B | $5.1B | $2.7B | $1.9B | $1.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.57x | 2.22x | -1.08x | 2.10x | -9.20x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HUN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AVNT five years ago would be worth $8,041 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,276 for CE. Over the past 12 months, HUN leads with a +38.4% total return vs EMN's +3.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EMN at 1.9% vs CE's -14.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +47.5% | +19.0% | +49.0% | +20.2% | -8.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +26.9% | +3.9% | +38.4% | +9.8% | +16.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -37.3% | +6.0% | -31.9% | +5.8% | -33.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.2% | -26.2% | -37.9% | -19.6% | -29.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +16.9% | +36.1% | +50.8% | +28.8% | +22.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -14.4% | +1.9% | -12.0% | +1.9% | -12.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CE and HUN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CE is the less volatile stock with a 1.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HUN's 1.73 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HUN currently trades 95.0% from its 52-week high vs ASH's 83.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.11x | 1.36x | 1.73x | 1.19x | 1.29x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $70.70 | $84.18 | $15.89 | $44.85 | $65.65 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $35.13 | $56.11 | $7.30 | $27.48 | $46.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.9% | +90.0% | +95.0% | +84.4% | +83.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.4 | 62.8 | 64.6 | 51.6 | 42.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.4M | 1.5M | 6.2M | 622K | 690K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — HUN and AVNT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CE as "Hold", EMN as "Buy", HUN as "Hold", AVNT as "Buy", ASH as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 27.9% upside for AVNT (target: $48) vs -20.5% for HUN (target: $12). For income investors, HUN offers the higher dividend yield at 5.60% vs CE's 0.19%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $65.40 | $77.29 | $12.00 | $48.40 | $67.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 37 | 35 | 33 | 20 | 24 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.2% | +4.4% | +5.6% | +2.8% | +3.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 12 | 0 | 14 | 7 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.12 | $3.30 | $0.85 | $1.08 | $1.65 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.2% | +0.1% | +0.1% | +4.0% |
HUN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). EMN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
CE vs EMN vs HUN vs AVNT vs ASH: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Avient Corporation (AVNT) is the stronger pick with 0.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 7% for Ashland Inc. (ASH). Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) offers the better valuation at 18. 5x trailing P/E (12. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) a "Buy" — based on 35 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 — CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH?
On trailing P/E, Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) is the cheapest at 18.
5x versus Avient Corporation at 42. 5x. On forward P/E, Celanese Corporation is actually cheaper at 11. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH?
Over the past 5 years, Avient Corporation (AVNT) delivered a total return of -19.
6%, compared to -57. 2% for Celanese Corporation (CE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HUN returned +50. 8% versus CE's +16. 9%. 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 — CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Celanese Corporation (CE) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
11β versus Huntsman Corporation's 1. 73β — meaning HUN is approximately 57% more volatile than CE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Avient Corporation (AVNT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 81% versus 3% for Celanese Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Avient Corporation (AVNT) is pulling ahead at 0.
6% versus -13. 7% for Ashland Inc. (ASH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Celanese Corporation grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to -643. 5% for Ashland Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CE leads at -0. 4% 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 — CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH?
Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) is the more profitable company, earning 5.
4% net margin versus -46. 3% for Ashland Inc. — meaning it keeps 5. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EMN leads at 10. 6% versus -42. 5% for ASH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AVNT leads at 32. 5%, 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 CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Celanese Corporation (CE) trades at 11.
1x forward P/E versus 14. 5x for Ashland Inc. — 3. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AVNT: 27. 9% to $48. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Huntsman Corporation (HUN) offers the highest yield at 5. 6%, versus 0. 2% for Celanese Corporation (CE).
09Is CE or EMN or HUN or AVNT or ASH better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Avient Corporation (AVNT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.
19), 2. 8% yield). Huntsman Corporation (HUN) carries a higher beta of 1. 73 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AVNT: +28. 8%, HUN: +50. 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 CE and EMN and HUN and AVNT and ASH?
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: CE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; EMN is a small-cap income-oriented stock; HUN is a small-cap income-oriented stock; AVNT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ASH is a small-cap income-oriented stock. EMN, HUN, AVNT, ASH pay a dividend while CE 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.