Chemicals - Specialty
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
KWR vs BCPC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
KWR vs BCPC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $2.46B | $5.17B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.93B | $1.06B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $4M | $158M |
| Gross Margin | 34.4% | 36.3% |
| Operating Margin | 3.7% | 21.0% |
| Forward P/E | 19.3x | 30.9x |
| Total Debt | $929M | $192M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $180M | $75M |
KWR vs BCPC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quaker Chemical Cor… (KWR) | 100 | 83.7 | -16.3% |
| Balchem Corporation (BCPC) | 100 | 158.5 | +58.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: KWR vs BCPC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
KWR is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 1.35, yield 1.4%, current ratio 2.42x
- Lower P/E (19.3x vs 30.9x)
- 1.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs BCPC's 0.5%
BCPC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.33, yield 0.5%
- Rev growth 8.8%, EPS growth 20.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.2%
- 162.8% 10Y total return vs KWR's 81.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.8% revenue growth vs KWR's 2.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (19.3x vs 30.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.0% margin vs KWR's 0.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs KWR's 1.35, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs BCPC's 0.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +44.4% vs BCPC's -0.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.4% ROA vs KWR's 0.2%, ROIC 12.2% vs 6.6% |
KWR vs BCPC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
KWR vs BCPC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BCPC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KWR is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.9B annually — 1.8x BCPC's $1.1B. BCPC is the more profitable business, keeping 15.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KWR's 0.2%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.9B | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $143M | $267M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $4M | $158M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $143M | $182M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.4% | +36.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.7% | +21.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.2% | +15.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.4% | +17.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.5% | +8.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +54.8% | +10.6% |
Valuation Metrics
KWR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, KWR's 11.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than BCPC's 20.1x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.5B | $5.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.2B | $5.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1013.29x | 33.97x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.32x | 30.87x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.65x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.86x | 20.06x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.30x | 4.98x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.80x | 4.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 30.51x | 29.86x |
Profitability & Efficiency
BCPC leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BCPC delivers a 12.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $0 for KWR. BCPC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.15x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KWR's 0.67x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BCPC scores 9/9 vs KWR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.3% | +12.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.2% | +9.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.6% | +12.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.6% | +14.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.67x | 0.15x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $749M | $117M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $180M | $75M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $929M | $192M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.41x | 15.23x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BCPC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BCPC five years ago would be worth $12,441 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,377 for KWR. Over the past 12 months, KWR leads with a +44.4% total return vs BCPC's -0.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BCPC at 8.6% vs KWR's -11.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.8% | +4.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +44.4% | -0.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -30.6% | +28.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -36.2% | +24.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +81.8% | +162.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -11.5% | +8.6% |
Risk & Volatility
BCPC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BCPC is the less volatile stock with a 0.33 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. BCPC currently trades 87.8% from its 52-week high vs KWR's 77.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.35x | 0.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $183.00 | $183.90 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $99.18 | $139.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +77.5% | +87.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.3 | 32.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 178K | 189K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KWR and BCPC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates KWR as "Buy" and BCPC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 24.3% upside for KWR (target: $176) vs 0.4% for BCPC (target: $162). For income investors, KWR offers the higher dividend yield at 1.39% vs BCPC's 0.54%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $176.33 | $162.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.4% | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 6 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.97 | $0.87 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.7% | +2.1% |
BCPC leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). KWR leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
KWR vs BCPC: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is KWR or BCPC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Balchem Corporation (BCPC) is the stronger pick with 8.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 7% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR). Balchem Corporation (BCPC) offers the better valuation at 34. 0x trailing P/E (30. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — KWR or BCPC?
On forward P/E, Quaker Chemical Corporation is actually cheaper at 19.
3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — KWR or BCPC?
Over the past 5 years, Balchem Corporation (BCPC) delivered a total return of +24.
4%, compared to -36. 2% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BCPC returned +160. 5% versus KWR's +88. 7%. 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 — KWR or BCPC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Balchem Corporation (BCPC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
33β versus Quaker Chemical Corporation's 1. 35β — meaning KWR is approximately 308% more volatile than BCPC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Balchem Corporation (BCPC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 15% versus 67% for Quaker Chemical Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — KWR or BCPC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Balchem Corporation (BCPC) is pulling ahead at 8.
8% versus 2. 7% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Balchem Corporation grew EPS 20. 9% year-over-year, compared to -102. 2% for Quaker Chemical Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, BCPC leads at 3. 2% 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 — KWR or BCPC?
Balchem Corporation (BCPC) is the more profitable company, earning 14.
9% net margin versus -0. 1% for Quaker Chemical Corporation — meaning it keeps 14. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BCPC leads at 21. 1% versus 9. 4% for KWR. 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 KWR or BCPC more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR) trades at 19.
3x forward P/E versus 30. 9x for Balchem Corporation — 11. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KWR: 24. 3% to $176. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — KWR or BCPC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR) offers the highest yield at 1. 4%, versus 0. 5% for Balchem Corporation (BCPC).
09Is KWR or BCPC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Balchem Corporation (BCPC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
33), 0. 5% yield, +160. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (BCPC: +160. 5%, 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 KWR and BCPC?
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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.