Chemicals - Specialty
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CMT vs LYTS vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Banks - Diversified
CMT vs LYTS vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $227M | $796M | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $271M | $592M | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $10M | $26M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 17.6% | 25.3% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | 4.4% | 6.5% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | 23.0x | 22.8x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $33M | $67M | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $38M | $3M | $343.34B |
CMT vs LYTS vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core Molding Techno… (CMT) | 100 | 598.1 | +498.1% |
| LSI Industries Inc. (LYTS) | 100 | 395.4 | +295.4% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CMT vs LYTS vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CMT is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.49, Low D/E 20.8%, current ratio 3.02x
- Beta 0.49, current ratio 3.02x
- Beta 0.49 vs LYTS's 1.43, lower leverage
LYTS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 22.1%, EPS growth -4.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.0%
- 22.1% revenue growth vs CMT's -9.5%
- +55.4% vs JPM's +21.8%
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs LYTS's 154.4%
- PEG 0.81 vs CMT's 4.08
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 22.1% revenue growth vs CMT's -9.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 22.8x), PEG 0.81 vs 1.34 | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs CMT's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.49 vs LYTS's 1.43, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs LYTS's 0.8%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +55.4% vs JPM's +21.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.5% ROA vs JPM's 1.3%, ROIC 9.5% vs 4.5% |
CMT vs LYTS vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CMT vs LYTS vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 1034.7x CMT's $271M. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CMT's 3.5%. On growth, LYTS holds the edge at -0.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $271M | $592M | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $21M | $51M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $10M | $26M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$15M | $38M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +17.6% | +25.3% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.4% | +6.5% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.5% | +4.3% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.7% | +6.4% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.7% | -0.5% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -72.2% | +11.1% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 51% valuation discount to LYTS's 32.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs CMT's 3.38x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $227M | $796M | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $222M | $860M | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 19.10x | 32.38x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 23.03x | 22.79x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.38x | 1.90x | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.34x | 17.78x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.83x | 1.39x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.35x | 3.42x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 118.29x | 22.98x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CMT leads this category, winning 4 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $6 for CMT. CMT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.2% | +10.9% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.2% | +6.5% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.6% | +9.5% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.8% | +12.6% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.21x | 0.29x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | $63M | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $38M | $3M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $33M | $67M | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 144.87x | 13.52x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — LYTS and JPM each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LYTS five years ago would be worth $32,257 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $18,252 for CMT. Over the past 12 months, LYTS leads with a +55.4% total return vs JPM's +21.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs CMT's 8.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +26.6% | +39.0% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +47.7% | +55.4% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +28.5% | +114.9% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.5% | +222.6% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +88.8% | +154.4% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +8.7% | +29.1% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CMT and LYTS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CMT is the less volatile stock with a 0.49 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LYTS's 1.43 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LYTS currently trades 96.3% from its 52-week high vs CMT's 85.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.49x | 1.43x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $28.69 | $26.56 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $16.12 | $16.00 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.9% | +96.3% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.7 | 65.8 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 32K | 487K | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CMT as "Buy", LYTS as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 11.4% upside for LYTS (target: $29) vs -2.6% for CMT (target: $24). For income investors, JPM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.86% vs LYTS's 0.76%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.00 | $28.50 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 5 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.8% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.19 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | 0.0% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). CMT leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
CMT vs LYTS vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CMT or LYTS or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, LSI Industries Inc.
(LYTS) is the stronger pick with 22. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 5% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — CMT or LYTS or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus LSI Industries Inc. at 32. 4x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x. 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 Core Molding Technologies, Inc. 's 4. 08x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CMT or LYTS or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, LSI Industries Inc.
(LYTS) delivered a total return of +222. 6%, compared to +82. 5% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus CMT's +88. 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 — CMT or LYTS or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Core Molding Technologies, Inc.
(CMT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 49β versus LSI Industries Inc. 's 1. 43β — meaning LYTS is approximately 194% more volatile than CMT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 21% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CMT or LYTS or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), LSI Industries Inc.
(LYTS) is pulling ahead at 22. 1% versus -9. 5% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: JPMorgan Chase & Co. grew EPS 1. 5% year-over-year, compared to -14. 6% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LYTS leads at 8. 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 — CMT or LYTS or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus 4. 1% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus 5. 2% for CMT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JPM leads at 59. 9%, 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 CMT or LYTS or JPM 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 Core Molding Technologies, Inc. 's 4. 08x. 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 23. 0x for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. — 8. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LYTS: 11. 4% to $28. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — CMT or LYTS or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield), LYTS (0. 8% yield) pay a dividend. CMT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CMT or LYTS or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 94), 1. 9% yield, +465. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +465. 8%, LYTS: +154. 4%), 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 CMT and LYTS and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (CMT (Basic Materials) and LYTS (Technology) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CMT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LYTS is a small-cap high-growth stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. LYTS, JPM pay a dividend while CMT 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.