Industrial Materials
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
LGO vs MP vs LAC vs ALB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial Materials
Industrial Materials
Chemicals - Specialty
LGO vs MP vs LAC 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 | $97M | $12.28B | $1.37B | $23.37B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $112M | $305M | $0.00 | $5.49B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-64M | $-71M | $-241M | $-233M |
| Gross Margin | -22.5% | 8.3% | — | 18.5% |
| Operating Margin | -36.4% | -36.4% | — | 5.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 274.3x | — | 22.4x |
| Total Debt | $18M | $1.04B | $23M | $3.30B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $22M | $1.17B | $594M | $1.62B |
LGO vs MP vs LAC vs ALB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Largo Inc. (LGO) | 100 | 18.4 | -81.6% |
| MP Materials Corp. (MP) | 100 | 693.4 | +593.4% |
| Lithium Americas Co… (LAC) | 100 | 180.3 | +80.3% |
| Albemarle Corporati… (ALB) | 100 | 256.9 | +156.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LGO vs MP vs LAC vs ALB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LGO lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
MP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- beta 1.40
- 5.9% 10Y total return vs LAC's 234.9%
- Beta 1.40, current ratio 7.24x
- 35.1% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0%
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
- 1.4% margin vs LGO's -57.3%
ALB carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth -4.4%, EPS growth 48.7%, 3Y rev CAGR -11.1%
- Better valuation composite
- 0.8% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend
- +256.7% vs LGO's -18.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.1% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 1.4% margin vs LGO's -57.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.40 vs LGO's 2.15 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +256.7% vs LGO's -18.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -1.4% ROA vs LGO's -19.9%, ROIC 0.6% vs -15.3% |
LGO vs MP vs LAC 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.
LGO vs MP vs LAC vs ALB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ALB leads in 2 of 6 categories
LGO leads 1 • MP leads 1 • LAC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALB leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALB and LAC operate at a comparable scale, with $5.5B and $0 in trailing revenue. ALB is the more profitable business, keeping -4.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LGO's -57.3%. On growth, MP holds the edge at +49.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $112M | $305M | $0 | $5.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$17M | -$43M | -$32M | $802M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$64M | -$71M | -$241M | -$233M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$29M | -$314M | -$648M | $577M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -22.5% | +8.3% | — | +18.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -36.4% | -36.4% | — | +5.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -57.3% | -23.3% | — | -4.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -26.3% | -102.8% | — | +10.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.2% | +49.1% | — | +32.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.7% | +121.4% | -21.4% | — |
Valuation Metrics
LGO leads this category, winning 2 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $97M | $12.3B | $1.4B | $23.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $92M | $12.2B | $801M | $25.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.49x | -138.26x | -26.95x | -34.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 274.33x | — | 22.36x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 33.21x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.78x | 44.59x | — | 4.55x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.43x | 4.92x | 1.20x | 2.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 33.76x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ALB leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ALB delivers a -2.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-2 in annual profit, vs $-47 for LGO. LAC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MP's 0.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ALB scores 6/9 vs LAC's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -47.1% | -3.7% | -26.9% | -2.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -19.9% | -2.0% | -16.6% | -1.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -15.3% | -4.7% | -7.1% | +0.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.6% | -4.2% | -3.9% | +0.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.10x | 0.44x | 0.02x | 0.34x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | -$123M | -$571M | $1.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $22M | $1.2B | $594M | $1.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $18M | $1.0B | $23M | $3.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.25x | -2.80x | — | 1.59x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MP five years ago would be worth $24,966 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $643 for LGO. Over the past 12 months, ALB leads with a +256.7% total return vs LGO's -18.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MP at 47.6% vs LGO's -37.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +10.5% | +25.8% | +18.7% | +38.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -18.3% | +192.7% | +84.4% | +256.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.1% | +221.7% | -55.6% | +9.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.6% | +149.7% | -31.3% | +26.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -74.2% | +591.3% | +234.9% | +217.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -37.1% | +47.6% | -23.7% | +3.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MP and ALB each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MP is the less volatile stock with a 1.40 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LGO's 2.15 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ALB currently trades 89.8% from its 52-week high vs LGO's 43.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.15x | 1.40x | 1.42x | 1.60x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.70 | $100.25 | $10.52 | $221.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.85 | $18.64 | $2.47 | $53.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +43.0% | +69.0% | +53.8% | +89.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.1 | 66.8 | 69.1 | 53.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.3M | 5.6M | 9.0M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LGO as "Buy", MP as "Buy", LAC as "Hold", ALB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 141.4% upside for LGO (target: $3) vs -3.8% for ALB (target: $191). 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 | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $2.80 | $78.25 | $7.00 | $190.80 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 11 | 15 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.62 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ALB leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). LGO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
LGO vs MP vs LAC vs ALB: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LGO or MP or LAC or ALB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is the stronger pick with 35. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -37. 1% for Largo Inc. (LGO). Analysts rate Largo Inc. (LGO) 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 is the better long-term investment — LGO or MP or LAC or ALB?
Over the past 5 years, MP Materials Corp.
(MP) delivered a total return of +149. 7%, compared to -93. 6% for Largo Inc. (LGO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MP returned +591. 3% versus LGO's -74. 2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — LGO or MP or LAC or ALB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 40β versus Largo Inc. 's 2. 15β — meaning LGO is approximately 54% more volatile than MP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 44% for MP Materials Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — LGO or MP or LAC or ALB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is pulling ahead at 35. 1% versus -37. 1% for Largo Inc. (LGO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Albemarle Corporation grew EPS 48. 7% year-over-year, compared to -757. 1% for Lithium Americas Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ALB leads at -11. 1% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — LGO or MP or LAC or ALB?
Lithium Americas Corp.
(LAC) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -39. 9% for Largo Inc. — 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 -44. 6% for MP. 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.
06Is LGO or MP or LAC or ALB more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) trades at 22.
4x forward P/E versus 274. 3x for MP Materials Corp. — 252. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LGO: 141. 4% to $2. 80.
07Which pays a better dividend — LGO or MP or LAC or ALB?
In this comparison, ALB (0.
8% yield) pays a dividend. LGO, MP, LAC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is LGO or MP or LAC 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). Largo Inc. (LGO) carries a higher beta of 2. 15 — 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%, LGO: -74. 2%), 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.
09What are the main differences between LGO and MP and LAC 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: LGO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MP is a mid-cap high-growth stock; LAC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ALB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ALB pays a dividend while LGO, MP, LAC 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.