GRO vs SQM

Analysts rate Brazil Potash Corp.

(GRO) a "Buy" — based on 1 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, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.

A. (SQM) delivered a total return of +94. 2%, compared to -80. 5% for Brazil Potash Corp. (GRO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SQM returned +464. 6% versus GRO's -80. 5%. 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), Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.

A. (SQM) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 24β versus Brazil Potash Corp. 's 1. 84β — meaning GRO is approximately 49% more volatile than SQM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Brazil Potash Corp. (GRO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 93% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.

A. grew EPS -120. 1% year-over-year, compared to -276. 5% for Brazil Potash Corp.. 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.

Brazil Potash Corp.

(GRO) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -8. 9% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SQM leads at 23. 5% versus 0. 0% for GRO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SQM leads at 29. 3%, 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GRO: 51.

5% to $4. 00.

In this comparison, SQM (0.

3% yield) pays a dividend. GRO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.

A. (SQM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 24), +464. 6% 10Y return). Brazil Potash Corp. (GRO) carries a higher beta of 1. 84 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SQM: +464. 6%, GRO: -80. 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.

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.

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.