FF vs CLMT

For growth investors, Calumet, Inc.

(CLMT) is the stronger pick with 0. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -60. 7% for FutureFuel Corp. (FF). Analysts rate FutureFuel Corp. (FF) a "Buy" — based on 4 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.

Over the past 5 years, Calumet, Inc.

(CLMT) delivered a total return of +441. 6%, compared to -17. 4% for FutureFuel Corp. (FF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CLMT returned +743. 5% versus FF's +54. 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), Calumet, Inc.

(CLMT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 40β versus FutureFuel Corp. 's 0. 49β — meaning FF is approximately 23% more volatile than CLMT relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Calumet, Inc.

(CLMT) is pulling ahead at 0. 2% versus -60. 7% for FutureFuel Corp. (FF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: FutureFuel Corp. grew EPS -422. 9% year-over-year, compared to -552. 5% for Calumet, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CLMT leads at 10. 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.

Calumet, Inc.

(CLMT) is the more profitable company, earning -5. 3% net margin versus -51. 6% for FutureFuel Corp. — meaning it keeps -5. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CLMT leads at 0. 2% versus -55. 3% for FF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CLMT leads at 5. 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.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Calumet, Inc.

(CLMT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 40), +743. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CLMT: +743. 5%, FF: +54. 0%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (FF (Basic Materials) and CLMT (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

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.