GRO vs SQM vs NTR vs MOS

For growth investors, Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) is the stronger pick with 5. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). The Mosaic Company (MOS) offers the better valuation at 5. 9x trailing P/E (15. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. 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.

On trailing P/E, The Mosaic Company (MOS) is the cheapest at 5.

9x versus Nutrien Ltd. at 14. 4x. On forward P/E, Nutrien Ltd. is actually cheaper at 12. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Nutrien Ltd. wins at 0. 29x versus The Mosaic Company's 0. 91x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

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), Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 07β versus Brazil Potash Corp. 's 1. 84β — meaning GRO is approximately -2641% more volatile than NTR 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.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) is pulling ahead at 5. 3% versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Mosaic Company grew EPS 605. 5% year-over-year, compared to -276. 5% for Brazil Potash Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SQM leads at 16. 5% 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.

The Mosaic Company (MOS) is the more profitable company, earning 10.

5% net margin versus -8. 9% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. — meaning it keeps 10. 5% 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 — NTR leads at 31. 0%, 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, Nutrien Ltd. (NTR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 29x versus The Mosaic Company's 0. 91x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Nutrien Ltd. (NTR) trades at 12. 0x forward P/E versus 15. 7x for The Mosaic Company — 3. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GRO: 51. 5% to $4. 00.

In this comparison, MOS (4.

2% yield), NTR (3. 2% yield), SQM (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. GRO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 07), 3. 2% yield). 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 (NTR: +54. 0%, 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.

In terms of investment character: GRO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SQM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; NTR is a mid-cap deep-value stock; MOS is a small-cap deep-value stock. NTR, MOS pay a dividend while GRO, SQM 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.