Industrial Materials
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs SQM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial Materials
Industrial Materials
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
LZM vs MP vs LAC 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 | $353M | $10.25B | $1.02B | $20.10B | $24.03B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $348M | $0.00 | $5.49B | $5.31B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-60M | $-71M | $-112M | $-233M | $817M |
| Gross Margin | -51.3% | 24.2% | — | 18.5% | 34.5% |
| Operating Margin | -55.8% | -39.4% | — | 5.6% | 29.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 247.8x | — | 14.0x | 13.3x |
| Total Debt | $58M | $1.04B | $166M | $3.30B | $4.82B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $1.17B | $568M | $1.62B | $1.75B |
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs SQM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lifezone Metals Lim… (LZM) | 100 | 39.7 | -60.3% |
| MP Materials Corp. (MP) | 100 | 126.7 | +26.7% |
| Lithium Americas Co… (LAC) | 100 | 25.3 | -74.7% |
| Albemarle Corporati… (ALB) | 100 | 72.9 | -27.1% |
| Sociedad Química y … (SQM) | 100 | 166.8 | +66.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs SQM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LZM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 6.5%, EPS growth 71.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -28.8%
- 6.5% revenue growth vs LAC's -138.9%
MP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 475.5% 10Y total return vs SQM's 358.0%
Among these 5 stocks, LAC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ALB is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 32 yrs, beta 1.69, yield 0.9%
- Beta 1.69, yield 0.9%, current ratio 2.23x
- 0.9% yield, 32-year raise streak, vs SQM's 0.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- +176.0% vs LZM's -5.1%
SQM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.38, Low D/E 59.8%, current ratio 3.27x
- Better valuation composite
- 15.4% margin vs LZM's -50.0%
- Beta 1.38 vs LZM's 2.57, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.5% revenue growth vs LAC's -138.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.4% margin vs LZM's -50.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.38 vs LZM's 2.57, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.9% yield, 32-year raise streak, vs SQM's 0.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +176.0% vs LZM's -5.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.1% ROA vs LZM's -36.2%, ROIC 8.6% vs -13.1% |
LZM vs MP vs LAC 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.
LZM vs MP vs LAC 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 3 of 6 categories
MP leads 1 • ALB leads 1 • LZM leads 0 • LAC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SQM leads this category, winning 5 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. SQM is the more profitable business, keeping 15.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LZM's -50.0%. On growth, LZM holds the edge at +7.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $348M | $0 | $5.5B | $5.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$64M | -$27M | -$56M | $802M | $1.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$60M | -$71M | -$112M | -$233M | $817M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$66M | -$314M | -$1.0B | $577M | $1.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -51.3% | +24.2% | — | +18.5% | +34.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -55.8% | -39.4% | — | +5.6% | +29.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -50.0% | -20.5% | — | -4.2% | +15.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -55.3% | -90.3% | — | +10.5% | +20.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.1% | +118.6% | — | +32.7% | +69.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +56.8% | +71.4% | +97.6% | — | +166.7% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — ALB and SQM each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, SQM's 17.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ALB's 28.9x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $353M | $10.2B | $1.0B | $20.1B | $24.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $392M | $10.1B | $613M | $21.8B | $27.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -23.12x | -115.10x | -8.92x | -29.64x | 40.84x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 247.85x | — | 13.98x | 13.25x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 1.50x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 28.87x | 17.35x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 334.25x | 37.19x | — | 3.91x | 5.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.31x | 4.09x | 0.70x | 2.05x | 2.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 29.02x | 54.98x |
Profitability & Efficiency
SQM leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SQM delivers a 12.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $-61 for LZM. LAC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.10x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LZM's 0.80x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SQM scores 7/9 vs LAC's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -60.9% | -3.5% | -8.3% | -2.3% | +12.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -36.2% | -2.0% | -5.3% | -1.4% | +6.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -13.1% | -4.7% | -5.1% | +0.6% | +8.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.8% | -4.2% | -3.1% | +0.6% | +10.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.80x | 0.44x | 0.10x | 0.34x | 0.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $38M | -$123M | -$403M | $1.7B | $3.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $1.2B | $568M | $1.6B | $1.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $58M | $1.0B | $166M | $3.3B | $4.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -4.30x | -2.91x | — | 1.59x | 8.87x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MP leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SQM five years ago would be worth $21,217 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,986 for LZM. Over the past 12 months, ALB leads with a +176.0% total return vs LZM's -5.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MP at 38.3% vs LAC's -29.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.3% | +4.7% | -4.6% | +19.0% | +22.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -5.1% | +97.1% | +73.0% | +176.0% | +155.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -63.3% | +164.5% | -64.4% | -19.6% | +26.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.1% | +73.0% | -46.6% | +6.0% | +112.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.1% | +475.5% | +137.0% | +137.7% | +358.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -28.4% | +38.3% | -29.1% | -7.0% | +8.0% |
Risk & Volatility
SQM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SQM is the less volatile stock with a 1.38 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LZM's 2.57 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SQM currently trades 85.8% from its 52-week high vs LAC's 43.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.57x | 1.91x | 2.07x | 1.69x | 1.38x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.40 | $100.25 | $10.52 | $221.00 | $98.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.07 | $25.17 | $2.47 | $55.90 | $31.90 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +61.4% | +57.4% | +43.3% | +77.1% | +85.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.8 | 43.5 | 41.1 | 40.5 | 48.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 757K | 6.0M | 11.0M | 2.0M | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
ALB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LZM as "Buy", MP as "Buy", LAC as "Hold", ALB as "Hold", SQM as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 78.1% upside for LZM (target: $7) vs 5.3% for SQM (target: $89). ALB is the only dividend payer here at 0.95% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $7.00 | $83.00 | $7.00 | $209.75 | $88.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 12 | 15 | 45 | 16 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.9% | +0.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 32 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.62 | $0.01 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
SQM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MP leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs SQM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or SQM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) is the stronger pick with 652.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 4% for Albemarle Corporation (ALB). Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM) offers the better valuation at 40. 8x trailing P/E (13. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) 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 — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or SQM?
On forward P/E, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. is actually cheaper at 13. 3x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or SQM?
Over the past 5 years, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) delivered a total return of +112. 2%, compared to -60. 1% for Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MP returned +475. 5% versus LZM's -60. 1%. 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 — LZM or MP or LAC 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. 38β versus Lifezone Metals Limited's 2. 57β — meaning LZM is approximately 87% more volatile than SQM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 80% for Lifezone Metals Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or SQM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) is pulling ahead at 652.
2% versus -4. 4% for Albemarle Corporation (ALB). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. grew EPS 245. 1% year-over-year, compared to -142. 9% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or SQM?
Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 9% net margin versus -1289. 2% for Lifezone Metals Limited — meaning it keeps 12. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SQM leads at 24. 8% versus -1724. 9% for LZM. 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 LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or SQM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) trades at 13. 3x forward P/E versus 247. 8x for MP Materials Corp. — 234. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LZM: 78. 1% to $7. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or SQM?
In this comparison, ALB (0.
9% yield) pays a dividend. LZM, MP, LAC, SQM do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LZM or MP or LAC 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.
9% yield, +137. 7% 10Y return). Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) carries a higher beta of 2. 57 — 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: +137. 7%, LZM: -60. 1%), 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 LZM and MP and LAC 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: LZM is a small-cap high-growth 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; SQM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ALB pays a dividend while LZM, MP, LAC, 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.