Industrial Materials
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial Materials
Industrial Materials
Chemicals - Specialty
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $1.85B | $1.37B | $932M | $23.37B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5.49B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-81M | $-241M | $166M | $-233M |
| Gross Margin | — | — | — | 18.5% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | — | 5.6% |
| Forward P/E | 24.3x | — | 6.5x | 22.4x |
| Total Debt | $211M | $23M | $989K | $3.30B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $86M | $594M | $39M | $1.62B |
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lithium Argentina AG (LAR) | 100 | 434.2 | +334.2% |
| Lithium Americas Co… (LAC) | 100 | 190.6 | +90.6% |
| Standard Lithium Lt… (SLI) | 100 | 267.8 | +167.8% |
| Albemarle Corporati… (ALB) | 100 | 230.4 | +130.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LAR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 321.3% 10Y total return vs LAC's 234.9%
- 2.3% margin vs ALB's -4.2%
- +460.3% vs LAC's +84.4%
LAC is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.42, Low D/E 2.4%, current ratio 10.33x
- Beta 1.42, current ratio 10.33x
- Beta 1.42 vs LAR's 1.79, lower leverage
SLI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- EPS growth 428.0%
- 401.6% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0%
- Lower P/E (6.5x vs 22.4x)
- 60.4% ROA vs LAC's -16.6%, ROIC -16.9% vs -7.1%
ALB is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 1.60, yield 0.8%
- 0.8% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 401.6% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.5x vs 22.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 2.3% margin vs ALB's -4.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.42 vs LAR's 1.79, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +460.3% vs LAC's +84.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 60.4% ROA vs LAC's -16.6%, ROIC -16.9% vs -7.1% |
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SLI leads in 2 of 6 categories
LAR leads 1 • ALB leads 1 • LAC leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SLI leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALB and SLI operate at a comparable scale, with $5.5B and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $0 | $0 | $5.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$37M | -$32M | -$7M | $802M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$81M | -$241M | $166M | -$233M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$33M | -$648M | -$23M | $577M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | +18.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | +5.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | -4.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | +10.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +32.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -38.0% | -21.4% | -103.3% | — |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — LAR and LAC and ALB each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.8B | $1.4B | $932M | $23.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.0B | $801M | $904M | $25.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -126.39x | -26.95x | 6.51x | -34.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 24.29x | — | — | 22.36x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 33.21x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | 4.55x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.06x | 1.20x | 2.82x | 2.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 33.76x |
Profitability & Efficiency
SLI leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SLI delivers a 68.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $68 in annual profit, vs $-27 for LAC. SLI carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ALB's 0.34x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ALB scores 6/9 vs LAR's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -9.2% | -26.9% | +68.2% | -2.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.2% | -16.6% | +60.4% | -1.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.3% | -7.1% | -16.9% | +0.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.7% | -3.9% | -21.0% | +0.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.24x | 0.02x | 0.00x | 0.34x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $125M | -$571M | -$52M | $1.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $86M | $594M | $39M | $1.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $211M | $23M | $989,000 | $3.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -2.26x | — | 2702.72x | 1.59x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LAR leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LAR five years ago would be worth $42,130 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,869 for LAC. Over the past 12 months, LAR leads with a +460.3% total return vs LAC's +84.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LAR at 61.5% vs LAC's -23.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +90.2% | +18.7% | -18.2% | +38.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +460.3% | +84.4% | +175.4% | +256.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +321.3% | -55.6% | +17.1% | +9.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +321.3% | -31.3% | +16.7% | +26.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +321.3% | +234.9% | +220.5% | +217.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +61.5% | -23.7% | +5.4% | +3.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LAR and LAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LAC is the less volatile stock with a 1.42 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LAR's 1.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LAR currently trades 94.9% from its 52-week high vs LAC's 53.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.79x | 1.42x | 1.55x | 1.60x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.99 | $10.52 | $6.40 | $221.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.71 | $2.47 | $1.40 | $53.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.9% | +53.8% | +61.1% | +89.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 75.6 | 69.1 | 57.0 | 53.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.3M | 9.0M | 1.8M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
ALB leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LAR as "Buy", LAC as "Hold", SLI as "Buy", ALB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 23.7% upside for LAC (target: $7) vs -24.9% for LAR (target: $9). ALB is the only dividend payer here at 0.82% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $8.54 | $7.00 | $4.75 | $190.80 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 15 | 3 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.62 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
SLI leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). LAR leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB a better buy right now?
Standard Lithium Ltd.
(SLI) offers the better valuation at 6. 5x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lithium Argentina AG (LAR) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB?
On forward P/E, Albemarle Corporation is actually cheaper at 22.
4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB?
Over the past 5 years, Lithium Argentina AG (LAR) delivered a total return of +321.
3%, compared to -31. 3% for Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LAR returned +321. 3% versus ALB's +217. 0%. 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 — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Lithium Americas Corp.
(LAC) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 42β versus Lithium Argentina AG's 1. 79β — meaning LAR is approximately 26% more volatile than LAC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Standard Lithium Ltd. (SLI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 34% for Albemarle Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB?
On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Standard Lithium Ltd.
grew EPS 428. 0% year-over-year, compared to -757. 1% for Lithium Americas 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB?
Lithium Argentina AG (LAR) is the more profitable company, earning 0.
0% net margin versus -9. 9% for Albemarle Corporation — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ALB leads at 1. 8% versus 0. 0% for SLI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ALB leads at 13. 1%, 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 LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) trades at 22.
4x forward P/E versus 24. 3x for Lithium Argentina AG — 1. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAC: 23. 7% to $7. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB?
In this comparison, ALB (0.
8% yield) pays a dividend. LAR, LAC, SLI do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0.
8% yield, +217. 0% 10Y return). Lithium Argentina AG (LAR) carries a higher beta of 1. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ALB: +217. 0%, LAR: +321. 3%), 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 LAR and LAC and SLI and ALB?
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: LAR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LAC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SLI is a small-cap deep-value stock; ALB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ALB pays a dividend while LAR, LAC, SLI 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.