Industrial Materials
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB vs SQM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial Materials
Industrial Materials
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB vs SQM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $1.85B | $1.37B | $932M | $23.37B | $13.08B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5.49B | $4.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-81M | $-241M | $166M | $-233M | $524M |
| Gross Margin | — | — | — | 18.5% | 27.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | — | 5.6% | 21.1% |
| Forward P/E | 24.3x | — | 6.5x | 22.4x | 15.0x |
| Total Debt | $211M | $23M | $989K | $3.30B | $4.82B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $86M | $594M | $39M | $1.62B | $1.38B |
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB vs SQM — 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% |
| Sociedad Química y … (SQM) | 100 | 251.9 | +151.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB vs SQM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LAR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +460.3% vs LAC's +84.4%
LAC is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.42, Low D/E 2.4%, current ratio 10.33x
SLI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth and value.
- 401.6% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0%
- Lower P/E (6.5x vs 15.0x)
- 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 and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 1.60, yield 0.8%
- Rev growth -4.4%, EPS growth 48.7%, 3Y rev CAGR -11.1%
- 0.8% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs SQM's 0.3%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
SQM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and defensive is your priority.
- 464.6% 10Y total return vs LAR's 321.3%
- Beta 1.24, yield 0.3%, current ratio 2.51x
- 12.1% margin vs ALB's -4.2%
- Beta 1.24 vs LAR's 1.79
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 15.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.1% margin vs ALB's -4.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.24 vs LAR's 1.79 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs SQM's 0.3%, (3 stocks pay no 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 vs SQM — 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 vs SQM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SQM leads in 2 of 6 categories
SLI leads 1 • LAR leads 1 • ALB leads 1 • LAC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SQM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALB and SLI operate at a comparable scale, with $5.5B and $0 in trailing revenue. SQM is the more profitable business, keeping 12.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ALB's -4.2%. On growth, ALB holds the edge at +32.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $0 | $0 | $5.5B | $4.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$37M | -$32M | -$7M | $802M | $917M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$81M | -$241M | $166M | -$233M | $524M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$33M | -$648M | -$23M | $577M | $66M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | +18.5% | +27.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | +5.6% | +21.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | -4.2% | +12.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | +10.5% | +1.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +32.7% | +8.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -38.0% | -21.4% | -103.3% | — | +34.8% |
Valuation Metrics
SQM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, SQM's 15.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ALB's 33.2x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.8B | $1.4B | $932M | $23.4B | $13.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.0B | $801M | $904M | $25.1B | $16.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -126.39x | -26.95x | 6.51x | -34.50x | -64.51x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 24.29x | — | — | 22.36x | 15.04x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 33.21x | 15.43x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | 4.55x | 2.89x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.06x | 1.20x | 2.82x | 2.39x | 5.02x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 33.76x | 43.19x |
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 SQM's 0.93x. 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% | +9.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.2% | -16.6% | +60.4% | -1.4% | +4.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.3% | -7.1% | -16.9% | +0.6% | +9.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.7% | -3.9% | -21.0% | +0.6% | +11.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.24x | 0.02x | 0.00x | 0.34x | 0.93x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $125M | -$571M | -$52M | $1.7B | $3.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $86M | $594M | $39M | $1.6B | $1.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $211M | $23M | $989,000 | $3.3B | $4.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -2.26x | — | 2702.72x | 1.59x | 5.37x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LAR leads this category, winning 5 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% | +31.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +460.3% | +84.4% | +175.4% | +256.7% | +173.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +321.3% | -55.6% | +17.1% | +9.3% | +40.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +321.3% | -31.3% | +16.7% | +26.8% | +94.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +321.3% | +234.9% | +220.5% | +217.0% | +464.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +61.5% | -23.7% | +5.4% | +3.0% | +12.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LAR and SQM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SQM is the less volatile stock with a 1.24 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 | 1.24x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.99 | $10.52 | $6.40 | $221.00 | $98.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.71 | $2.47 | $1.40 | $53.70 | $29.36 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.9% | +53.8% | +61.1% | +89.8% | +93.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 75.6 | 69.1 | 57.0 | 53.0 | 61.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.3M | 9.0M | 1.8M | 2.0M | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
ALB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LAR as "Buy", LAC as "Hold", SLI as "Buy", ALB as "Hold", SQM as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 23.7% upside for LAC (target: $7) vs -24.9% for LAR (target: $9). For income investors, ALB offers the higher dividend yield at 0.82% vs SQM's 0.26%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $8.54 | $7.00 | $4.75 | $190.80 | $75.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 15 | 3 | 45 | 16 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.8% | +0.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | 15 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.62 | $0.24 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
SQM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). SLI leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
LAR vs LAC vs SLI vs ALB vs SQM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB or SQM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) is the stronger pick with -4.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). 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 or SQM?
On forward P/E, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. is actually cheaper at 15. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB or SQM?
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: SQM returned +464. 6% 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 or SQM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 24β versus Lithium Argentina AG's 1. 79β — meaning LAR is approximately 45% more volatile than SQM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Standard Lithium Ltd. (SLI) 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.
05Which is growing faster — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB or SQM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Albemarle Corporation (ALB) is pulling ahead at -4.
4% versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). 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.. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LAR or LAC or SLI or ALB or SQM?
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: SQM leads at 23. 5% versus 0. 0% for SLI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SQM leads at 29. 3%, 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 or SQM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) trades at 15. 0x forward P/E versus 24. 3x for Lithium Argentina AG — 9. 3x 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 or SQM?
In this comparison, ALB (0.
8% yield), SQM (0. 3% yield) pay 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 or SQM 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 and SQM?
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; SQM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ALB pays a dividend while LAR, LAC, SLI, 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.
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.