Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
INDO vs GURE vs CHNR vs IOSP vs HWKN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Waste Management
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
INDO vs GURE vs CHNR vs IOSP vs HWKN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Chemicals - Specialty | Waste Management | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $46M | $4M | $42M | $2.00B | $3.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4M | $14M | $0.00 | $1.79B | $1.06B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-8M | $-27M | $-14M | $114M | $82M |
| Gross Margin | -10.7% | -82.1% | — | 27.4% | 22.9% |
| Operating Margin | -173.4% | -116.6% | — | 8.3% | 11.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 16.2x | 42.4x |
| Total Debt | $882K | $9M | $0.00 | $90M | $160M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $10M | $3M | $293M | $5M |
INDO vs GURE vs CHNR vs IOSP vs HWKN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indonesia Energy Co… (INDO) | 100 | 79.8 | -20.2% |
| Gulf Resources, Inc. (GURE) | 100 | 7.8 | -92.2% |
| China Natural Resou… (CHNR) | 100 | 13.3 | -86.7% |
| Innospec Inc. (IOSP) | 100 | 104.5 | +4.5% |
| Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN) | 100 | 779.3 | +679.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: INDO vs GURE vs CHNR vs IOSP vs HWKN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
INDO lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
GURE ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.52, Low D/E 6.1%, current ratio 0.98x
- Beta 0.52 vs CHNR's 1.10
Among these 5 stocks, CHNR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
IOSP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.71, yield 2.1%
- PEG 0.51 vs HWKN's 1.71
- Beta 0.71, yield 2.1%, current ratio 2.79x
- Lower P/E (16.2x vs 42.4x), PEG 0.51 vs 1.71
HWKN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for 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 IOSP's 92.6%
- 6.0% revenue growth vs CHNR's -100.0%
- 7.8% margin vs GURE's -195.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.0% revenue growth vs CHNR's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (16.2x vs 42.4x), PEG 0.51 vs 1.71 | |
| Quality / Margins | 7.8% margin vs GURE's -195.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.52 vs CHNR's 1.10 | |
| Dividends | 2.1% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs HWKN's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +40.6% vs GURE's -44.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.4% ROA vs INDO's -40.4%, ROIC 15.9% vs -31.5% |
INDO vs GURE vs CHNR vs IOSP vs HWKN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
INDO vs GURE vs CHNR vs IOSP vs HWKN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HWKN leads in 3 of 6 categories
IOSP leads 2 • INDO leads 0 • GURE leads 0 • CHNR leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HWKN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IOSP and CHNR operate at a comparable scale, with $1.8B and $0 in trailing revenue. HWKN is the more profitable business, keeping 7.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GURE's -195.8%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4M | $14M | $0 | $1.8B | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$6M | $1M | -$12M | $181M | $172M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$8M | -$27M | -$14M | $114M | $82M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$6M | -$498,990 | -$6M | $77M | $88M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -10.7% | -82.1% | — | +27.4% | +22.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -173.4% | -116.6% | — | +8.3% | +11.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -173.0% | -195.8% | — | +6.4% | +7.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -146.4% | -3.6% | — | +4.3% | +8.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +45.4% | +2.5% | — | +2.8% | +7.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -7.3% | +98.1% | +91.3% | -6.9% | -4.2% |
Valuation Metrics
IOSP leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.2x trailing earnings, IOSP trades at a 58% valuation discount to HWKN's 41.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IOSP offers better value at 0.54x vs HWKN's 1.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $46M | $4M | $42M | $2.0B | $3.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $43M | $2M | $41M | $1.8B | $3.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -4.98x | -0.06x | -88.65x | 17.25x | 41.48x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 16.24x | 42.35x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.54x | 1.67x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 8.76x | 22.76x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 17.36x | 0.47x | — | 1.13x | 3.56x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.72x | 0.03x | 3.21x | 1.51x | 7.60x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 22.78x | 49.53x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HWKN leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HWKN delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $-50 for INDO. INDO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HWKN's 0.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IOSP scores 6/9 vs CHNR's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -49.7% | -19.2% | -15.7% | +8.5% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -40.4% | -16.6% | -5.3% | +6.3% | +8.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -31.5% | -11.2% | -0.0% | +11.2% | +15.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -32.9% | -11.6% | -0.0% | +11.0% | +19.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.05x | 0.06x | — | 0.07x | 0.35x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$4M | -$1M | -$3M | -$203M | $155M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $10M | $3M | $293M | $5M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $881,639 | $9M | $0 | $90M | $160M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -268.95x | -263.29x | — | 10.27x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HWKN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HWKN five years ago would be worth $50,906 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $511 for GURE. Over the past 12 months, HWKN leads with a +40.6% total return vs GURE's -44.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HWKN at 61.2% vs GURE's -51.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -1.6% | -11.5% | +22.2% | +5.6% | +15.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +22.1% | -44.9% | +2.1% | -11.9% | +40.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -34.3% | -88.4% | -79.7% | -13.4% | +319.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -40.6% | -94.9% | -92.6% | -12.7% | +409.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -71.1% | -95.3% | -93.5% | +92.6% | +766.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -13.0% | -51.2% | -41.2% | -4.7% | +61.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — INDO and HWKN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INDO is the less volatile stock with a -2.22 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CHNR's 1.10 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HWKN currently trades 89.8% from its 52-week high vs GURE's 28.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -2.22x | 0.52x | 1.10x | 0.71x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $8.50 | $11.83 | $8.20 | $95.55 | $186.15 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.25 | $2.04 | $3.16 | $65.58 | $115.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +36.4% | +28.7% | +52.4% | +84.3% | +89.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.9 | 39.7 | 55.8 | 53.9 | 62.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.9M | 60K | 893K | 224K | 168K |
Analyst Outlook
IOSP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IOSP as "Hold", HWKN as "Buy". For income investors, IOSP offers the higher dividend yield at 2.11% vs HWKN's 0.42%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | — | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | — | $115.00 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | — | 9 | 1 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +2.1% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 | 0 | 12 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.70 | $0.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.7% |
HWKN leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). IOSP leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
INDO vs GURE vs CHNR vs IOSP vs HWKN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is the stronger pick with 6. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -74. 5% for Gulf Resources, Inc. (GURE). Innospec Inc. (IOSP) offers the better valuation at 17. 2x trailing P/E (16. 2x 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 — INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN?
On trailing P/E, Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the cheapest at 17. 2x versus Hawkins, Inc. at 41. 5x. On forward P/E, Innospec Inc. is actually cheaper at 16. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Innospec Inc. wins at 0. 51x versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 1. 71x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN?
Over the past 5 years, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) delivered a total return of +409. 1%, compared to -94. 9% for Gulf Resources, Inc. (GURE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HWKN returned +766. 7% versus GURE's -95. 3%. 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 — INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Indonesia Energy Corporation Limited (INDO) is the lower-risk stock at -2.
22β versus China Natural Resources, Inc. 's 1. 10β — meaning CHNR is approximately -150% more volatile than INDO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Indonesia Energy Corporation Limited (INDO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 35% for Hawkins, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is pulling ahead at 6. 0% versus -74. 5% for Gulf Resources, Inc. (GURE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innospec Inc. grew EPS 228. 9% year-over-year, compared to -138. 5% for Indonesia Energy Corporation Limited. 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 — INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN?
Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 7% net margin versus -769. 3% for Gulf Resources, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HWKN leads at 12. 2% versus -277. 8% for GURE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IOSP leads at 27. 7%, 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 INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN 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. 51x versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 1. 71x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) trades at 16. 2x forward P/E versus 42. 4x for Hawkins, Inc. — 26. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN?
In this comparison, IOSP (2.
1% yield), HWKN (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. INDO, GURE, CHNR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is INDO or GURE or CHNR or IOSP or HWKN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Indonesia Energy Corporation Limited (INDO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -2.
22)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (INDO: -71. 1%, CHNR: -93. 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.
10What are the main differences between INDO and GURE and CHNR and IOSP and HWKN?
These companies operate in different sectors (INDO (Energy) and GURE (Basic Materials) and CHNR (Industrials) and IOSP (Basic Materials) and HWKN (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: INDO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GURE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CHNR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IOSP is a small-cap deep-value stock; HWKN is a small-cap quality compounder stock. IOSP pays a dividend while INDO, GURE, CHNR, HWKN 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.
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.