CPAC vs MLM

For growth investors, Cementos Pacasmayo S.

A. A. (CPAC) is the stronger pick with 1. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 1% for Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. (MLM). Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. (CPAC) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (8. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. (MLM) a "Buy" — based on 40 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.

On trailing P/E, Cementos Pacasmayo S.

A. A. (CPAC) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. at 31. 9x. On forward P/E, Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. is actually cheaper at 8. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. wins at 1. 00x versus Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. 's 3. 00x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Cementos Pacasmayo S.

A. A. (CPAC) delivered a total return of +95. 2%, compared to +62. 5% for Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. (MLM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MLM returned +242. 7% versus CPAC's +89. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cementos Pacasmayo S.

A. A. (CPAC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 13β versus Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. 's 0. 87β — meaning MLM is approximately 590% more volatile than CPAC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. (MLM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 53% versus 124% for Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cementos Pacasmayo S.

A. A. (CPAC) is pulling ahead at 1. 4% versus 0. 1% for Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. (MLM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. grew EPS 17. 9% year-over-year, compared to -42. 0% for Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MLM leads at 2. 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.

Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.

(MLM) is the more profitable company, earning 17. 4% net margin versus 10. 1% for Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. — meaning it keeps 17. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MLM leads at 23. 3% versus 19. 8% for CPAC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CPAC leads at 36. 8%, 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.

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, Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. (CPAC) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 00x versus Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. 's 3. 00x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. (CPAC) trades at 8. 3x forward P/E versus 30. 8x for Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. — 22. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CPAC: 20. 1% to $12. 80.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Cementos Pacasmayo S. A. A. (CPAC) offers the highest yield at 5. 5%, versus 0. 5% for Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. (MLM).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Cementos Pacasmayo S.

A. A. (CPAC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 13), 5. 5% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CPAC: +89. 0%, MLM: +242. 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.

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: CPAC is a small-cap deep-value stock; MLM is a mid-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.