Chemicals - Specialty
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
HWKN vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
HWKN vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $3.46B | $2.48B | $4.24B | $1.91B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.06B | $1.93B | $3.58B | $1.78B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $82M | $4M | $285M | $117M |
| Gross Margin | 22.9% | 34.4% | 24.8% | 27.7% |
| Operating Margin | 11.5% | 3.7% | 15.7% | 8.7% |
| Forward P/E | 42.3x | 19.3x | 13.0x | 15.5x |
| Total Debt | $160M | $929M | $1.22B | $90M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $180M | $258M | $293M |
HWKN vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN) | 100 | 778.6 | +678.6% |
| Quaker Chemical Cor… (KWR) | 100 | 83.7 | -16.3% |
| Cabot Corporation (CBT) | 100 | 227.5 | +127.5% |
| Innospec Inc. (IOSP) | 100 | 99.4 | -0.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HWKN vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HWKN has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 6.0%, EPS growth 12.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.0%
- 7.7% 10Y total return vs CBT's 115.7%
- 6.0% revenue growth vs CBT's -7.0%
- 8.4% ROA vs KWR's 0.2%, ROIC 15.9% vs 6.6%
KWR is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +45.1% vs IOSP's -14.9%
CBT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and quality is your priority.
- Lower P/E (13.0x vs 19.3x)
- 8.0% margin vs KWR's 0.2%
IOSP is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.70, yield 2.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, Low D/E 6.7%, current ratio 2.79x
- PEG 0.48 vs HWKN's 1.70
- Beta 0.70, yield 2.2%, current ratio 2.79x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.0% revenue growth vs CBT's -7.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.0x vs 19.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.0% margin vs KWR's 0.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs KWR's 1.35, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.2% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs HWKN's 0.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +45.1% vs IOSP's -14.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.4% ROA vs KWR's 0.2%, ROIC 15.9% vs 6.6% |
HWKN vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HWKN vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CBT leads in 2 of 6 categories
HWKN leads 1 • IOSP leads 1 • KWR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CBT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CBT is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.6B annually — 3.4x HWKN's $1.1B. CBT is the more profitable business, keeping 8.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KWR's 0.2%. On growth, KWR holds the edge at +8.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.1B | $1.9B | $3.6B | $1.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $172M | $143M | $731M | $198M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $82M | $4M | $285M | $117M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $88M | $143M | $459M | $88M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +22.9% | +34.4% | +24.8% | +27.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.5% | +3.7% | +15.7% | +8.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.8% | +0.2% | +8.0% | +6.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.2% | +7.4% | +12.8% | +4.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.9% | +8.5% | -3.4% | -2.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.2% | +54.8% | -23.1% | +167.7% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CBT and IOSP each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.5x trailing earnings, CBT trades at a 67% valuation discount to HWKN's 41.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IOSP offers better value at 0.51x vs HWKN's 1.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.5B | $2.5B | $4.2B | $1.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.6B | $3.2B | $5.2B | $1.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 41.44x | -1021.00x | 13.50x | 16.41x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 42.31x | 19.32x | 13.04x | 15.45x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.67x | — | — | 0.51x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.74x | 11.93x | 6.71x | 8.29x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.55x | 1.31x | 1.14x | 1.07x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.60x | 1.81x | 2.58x | 1.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 49.48x | 30.74x | 10.86x | 21.68x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CBT leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CBT delivers a 16.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $0 for KWR. IOSP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CBT's 0.71x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HWKN scores 6/9 vs KWR's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +15.9% | +0.3% | +16.8% | +9.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.4% | +0.2% | +7.4% | +6.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +15.9% | +6.6% | +17.4% | +11.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +19.3% | +7.6% | +21.3% | +11.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.35x | 0.67x | 0.71x | 0.07x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $155M | $749M | $957M | -$203M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $180M | $258M | $293M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $160M | $929M | $1.2B | $90M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 10.27x | 1.41x | 14.72x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HWKN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HWKN five years ago would be worth $49,115 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,267 for KWR. Over the past 12 months, KWR leads with a +45.1% total return vs IOSP's -14.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HWKN at 61.2% vs KWR's -11.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +15.1% | +3.6% | +21.9% | +0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +40.6% | +45.1% | +13.8% | -14.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +318.9% | -30.1% | +22.5% | -17.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +391.1% | -37.3% | +43.2% | -18.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +765.9% | +88.7% | +115.7% | +84.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +61.2% | -11.2% | +7.0% | -6.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CBT and IOSP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IOSP is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KWR's 1.35 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CBT currently trades 96.1% from its 52-week high vs KWR's 78.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.98x | 1.35x | 0.78x | 0.70x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $186.15 | $183.00 | $84.60 | $95.55 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $115.35 | $99.18 | $58.33 | $65.58 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.7% | +78.1% | +96.1% | +80.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.9 | 58.2 | 71.7 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 169K | 176K | 374K | 221K |
Analyst Outlook
IOSP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HWKN as "Buy", KWR as "Buy", CBT as "Buy", IOSP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 50.1% upside for IOSP (target: $115) vs -4.0% for CBT (target: $78). For income investors, IOSP offers the higher dividend yield at 2.21% vs HWKN's 0.42%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $176.33 | $78.00 | $115.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 14 | 15 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.4% | +1.4% | +2.2% | +2.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 5 | 6 | 4 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.70 | $1.97 | $1.77 | $1.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | +1.7% | +4.0% | 0.0% |
CBT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). HWKN leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
HWKN vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is the stronger pick with 6. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 0% for Cabot Corporation (CBT). Cabot Corporation (CBT) offers the better valuation at 13. 5x trailing P/E (13. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN) 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.
02Which has the better valuation — HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
On trailing P/E, Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the cheapest at 13.
5x versus Hawkins, Inc. at 41. 4x. On forward P/E, Cabot Corporation is actually cheaper at 13. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Innospec Inc. wins at 0. 48x versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 1. 70x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
Over the past 5 years, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) delivered a total return of +391. 1%, compared to -37. 3% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HWKN returned +765. 9% versus IOSP's +84. 4%. 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 — HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 70β versus Quaker Chemical Corporation's 1. 35β — meaning KWR is approximately 93% more volatile than IOSP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 71% for Cabot Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is pulling ahead at 6. 0% versus -7. 0% for Cabot Corporation (CBT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innospec Inc. grew EPS 228. 9% year-over-year, compared to -102. 2% for Quaker Chemical Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, HWKN leads at 8. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
9% net margin versus -0. 1% for Quaker Chemical Corporation — meaning it keeps 8. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CBT leads at 16. 7% versus 8. 8% for IOSP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KWR leads at 36. 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.
07Is HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP 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, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 48x versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 1. 70x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Cabot Corporation (CBT) trades at 13. 0x forward P/E versus 42. 3x for Hawkins, Inc. — 29. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IOSP: 50. 1% to $115. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Innospec Inc. (IOSP) offers the highest yield at 2. 2%, versus 0. 4% for Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN).
09Is HWKN or KWR or CBT or IOSP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 70), 2. 2% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IOSP: +84. 4%, KWR: +88. 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.
10What are the main differences between HWKN and KWR and CBT and IOSP?
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: HWKN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; KWR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CBT is a small-cap deep-value stock; IOSP is a small-cap deep-value stock. KWR, CBT, IOSP pay a dividend while HWKN does 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.