Chemicals - Specialty
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CMT vs UFPT vs TREX vs ESAB vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Construction
Manufacturing - Metal Fabrication
Banks - Diversified
CMT vs UFPT vs TREX vs ESAB vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Medical - Devices | Construction | Manufacturing - Metal Fabrication | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $227M | $1.81B | $4.74B | $5.57B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $271M | $603M | $1.18B | $2.91B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $10M | $68M | $191M | $207M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 17.6% | 28.3% | 39.2% | 35.4% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | 4.4% | 15.3% | 22.1% | 16.6% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | 23.0x | 24.7x | 27.2x | 15.8x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $33M | $154M | $229M | $1.43B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $38M | $20M | $4M | $186M | $343.34B |
CMT vs UFPT vs TREX vs ESAB vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 22 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core Molding Techno… (CMT) | 100 | 229.0 | +129.0% |
| UFP Technologies, I… (UFPT) | 100 | 355.1 | +255.1% |
| Trex Company, Inc. (TREX) | 100 | 69.8 | -30.2% |
| ESAB Corporation (ESAB) | 100 | 183.1 | +83.1% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 235.3 | +135.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CMT vs UFPT vs TREX vs ESAB vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CMT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.49, Low D/E 20.8%, current ratio 3.02x
- Beta 0.49, current ratio 3.02x
- Beta 0.49 vs TREX's 1.51, lower leverage
- +47.7% vs ESAB's -26.5%
UFPT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 19.5%, EPS growth 15.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 19.4%
- 10.2% 10Y total return vs JPM's 465.8%
- PEG 0.66 vs TREX's 8.14
- 19.5% revenue growth vs CMT's -9.5%
TREX is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- 12.3% ROA vs JPM's 1.3%, ROIC 16.4% vs 4.5%
Among these 5 stocks, ESAB doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
JPM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 15.8x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.18
- 20.4% margin vs CMT's 3.5%
- 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ESAB's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.5% revenue growth vs CMT's -9.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 15.8x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.18 | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs CMT's 3.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.49 vs TREX's 1.51, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ESAB's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +47.7% vs ESAB's -26.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.3% ROA vs JPM's 1.3%, ROIC 16.4% vs 4.5% |
CMT vs UFPT vs TREX vs ESAB vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CMT vs UFPT vs TREX vs ESAB vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
TREX leads 1 • CMT leads 0 • UFPT leads 0 • ESAB leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓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, ESAB holds the edge at +9.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $271M | $603M | $1.2B | $2.9B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $21M | $116M | $327M | $585M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $10M | $68M | $191M | $207M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$15M | $79M | $239M | $218M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +17.6% | +28.3% | +39.2% | +35.4% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.4% | +15.3% | +22.1% | +16.6% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.5% | +11.3% | +16.3% | +7.1% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.7% | +13.1% | +20.3% | +7.5% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.7% | +3.4% | +1.0% | +9.9% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -72.2% | +6.7% | +3.6% | -29.1% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CMT and JPM each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 40% valuation discount to UFPT's 26.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), UFPT offers better value at 0.71x vs TREX's 7.66x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $227M | $1.8B | $4.7B | $5.6B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $222M | $1.9B | $5.0B | $6.8B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 19.10x | 26.79x | 25.63x | 24.62x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 23.03x | 24.72x | 27.22x | 15.85x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.38x | 0.71x | 7.66x | 3.39x | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.34x | 16.81x | 15.47x | 11.85x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.83x | 3.01x | 4.04x | 1.96x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.35x | 4.33x | 4.72x | 2.52x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 118.29x | 22.94x | 35.24x | 26.14x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
TREX leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TREX delivers a 18.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $19 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. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), UFPT scores 6/9 vs JPM's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.2% | +17.4% | +18.8% | +9.5% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.2% | +10.5% | +12.3% | +4.2% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.6% | +12.7% | +16.4% | +11.9% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.8% | +16.1% | +23.2% | +13.1% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.21x | 0.36x | 0.22x | 0.65x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | $134M | $225M | $1.2B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $38M | $20M | $4M | $186M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $33M | $154M | $229M | $1.4B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 144.87x | 9.42x | — | 4.54x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — UFPT and JPM each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in UFPT five years ago would be worth $40,725 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,561 for TREX. Over the past 12 months, CMT leads with a +47.7% total return vs ESAB's -26.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs TREX's -7.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +26.6% | +5.2% | +27.4% | -18.6% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +47.7% | -1.0% | -20.1% | -26.5% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +28.5% | +36.0% | -21.9% | +43.3% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.5% | +307.2% | -54.4% | +85.5% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +88.8% | +1018.2% | +340.6% | +85.5% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +8.7% | +10.8% | -7.9% | +12.7% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CMT and JPM 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 TREX's 1.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 95.1% from its 52-week high vs TREX's 66.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.49x | 1.11x | 1.51x | 1.41x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $28.69 | $274.93 | $68.78 | $137.42 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $16.12 | $173.88 | $29.77 | $82.19 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.9% | +85.5% | +66.3% | +66.6% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.7 | 68.3 | 66.5 | 45.5 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 32K | 203K | 1.7M | 570K | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CMT as "Buy", UFPT as "Buy", TREX as "Hold", ESAB as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 54.0% upside for ESAB (target: $141) vs -2.6% for CMT (target: $24). For income investors, JPM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.86% vs ESAB's 0.39%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.00 | $298.00 | $48.33 | $141.00 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 2 | 31 | 10 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.4% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.36 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | 0.0% | +1.1% | 0.0% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). TREX leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
CMT vs UFPT vs TREX vs ESAB vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CMT or UFPT or TREX or ESAB or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, UFP Technologies, Inc.
(UFPT) is the stronger pick with 19. 5% 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 UFPT or TREX or ESAB or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus UFP Technologies, Inc. at 26. 8x. 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: UFP Technologies, Inc. wins at 0. 66x versus Trex Company, Inc. 's 8. 14x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CMT or UFPT or TREX or ESAB or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, UFP Technologies, Inc.
(UFPT) delivered a total return of +307. 2%, compared to -54. 4% for Trex Company, Inc. (TREX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UFPT returned +1018% 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 — CMT or UFPT or TREX or ESAB or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Core Molding Technologies, Inc.
(CMT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 49β versus Trex Company, Inc. 's 1. 51β — meaning TREX is approximately 210% 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 UFPT or TREX or ESAB or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), UFP Technologies, Inc.
(UFPT) is pulling ahead at 19. 5% versus -9. 5% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: UFP Technologies, Inc. grew EPS 15. 7% year-over-year, compared to -14. 8% for Trex Company, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, UFPT leads at 19. 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 — CMT or UFPT or TREX or ESAB 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 UFPT or TREX or ESAB 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, UFP Technologies, Inc. (UFPT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 66x versus Trex Company, Inc. 's 8. 14x. 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 27. 2x for Trex Company, Inc. — 12. 8x 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 — CMT or UFPT or TREX or ESAB or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield), ESAB (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CMT, UFPT, TREX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CMT or UFPT or TREX or ESAB 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%, 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 CMT and UFPT and TREX and ESAB and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (CMT (Basic Materials) and UFPT (Healthcare) and TREX (Industrials) and ESAB (Industrials) 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; UFPT is a small-cap high-growth stock; TREX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ESAB is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. JPM pays a dividend while CMT, UFPT, TREX, 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.