Chemicals - Specialty
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
MTX vs HWKN vs ECL vs IOSP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
MTX vs HWKN vs ECL vs IOSP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $2.42B | $3.46B | $72.46B | $1.91B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.13B | $1.06B | $16.08B | $1.78B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $162M | $82M | $2.08B | $117M |
| Gross Margin | 18.7% | 22.9% | 44.5% | 27.7% |
| Operating Margin | 13.1% | 11.5% | 17.7% | 8.7% |
| Forward P/E | 12.6x | 42.3x | 30.6x | 15.5x |
| Total Debt | $1.05B | $160M | $9.43B | $90M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $329M | $5M | $646M | $293M |
MTX vs HWKN vs ECL vs IOSP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minerals Technologi… (MTX) | 100 | 157.8 | +57.8% |
| Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN) | 100 | 778.6 | +678.6% |
| Ecolab Inc. (ECL) | 100 | 120.7 | +20.7% |
| Innospec Inc. (IOSP) | 100 | 99.4 | -0.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MTX vs HWKN vs ECL vs IOSP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MTX is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +49.5% vs IOSP's -14.9%
HWKN is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 6.0%, EPS growth 12.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.0%
- 7.7% 10Y total return vs ECL's 139.5%
- 6.0% revenue growth vs IOSP's -3.7%
ECL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.63, yield 1.0%
- 12.9% margin vs IOSP's 6.6%
- Beta 0.63 vs HWKN's 0.98
- 8.8% ROA vs MTX's 6.2%, ROIC 12.7% vs 8.7%
IOSP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, Low D/E 6.7%, current ratio 2.79x
- PEG 0.48 vs HWKN's 1.70
- Beta 0.70, yield 2.2%, current ratio 2.79x
- Lower P/E (15.5x vs 30.6x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.0% revenue growth vs IOSP's -3.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.5x vs 30.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.9% margin vs IOSP's 6.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.63 vs HWKN's 0.98 | |
| Dividends | 2.2% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs MTX's 0.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +49.5% vs IOSP's -14.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.8% ROA vs MTX's 6.2%, ROIC 12.7% vs 8.7% |
MTX vs HWKN vs ECL vs IOSP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MTX vs HWKN vs ECL vs IOSP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ECL leads in 1 of 6 categories
MTX leads 1 • HWKN leads 1 • IOSP leads 1 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ECL leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ECL is the larger business by revenue, generating $16.1B annually — 15.1x HWKN's $1.1B. ECL is the more profitable business, keeping 12.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IOSP's 6.6%. On growth, MTX holds the edge at +11.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.1B | $1.1B | $16.1B | $1.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $354M | $172M | $3.5B | $198M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $162M | $82M | $2.1B | $117M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $118M | $88M | $1.9B | $88M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +18.7% | +22.9% | +44.5% | +27.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +13.1% | +11.5% | +17.7% | +8.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.6% | +7.8% | +12.9% | +6.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.6% | +8.2% | +11.8% | +4.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.2% | +7.9% | +4.8% | -2.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +125.9% | -4.2% | +19.3% | +167.7% |
Valuation Metrics
MTX leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.4x trailing earnings, IOSP trades at a 60% valuation discount to HWKN's 41.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IOSP offers better value at 0.51x vs HWKN's 1.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.4B | $3.5B | $72.5B | $1.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.1B | $3.6B | $81.2B | $1.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -131.88x | 41.44x | 35.24x | 16.41x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.56x | 42.31x | 30.64x | 15.45x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.67x | — | 0.51x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.99x | 22.74x | 22.66x | 8.29x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.17x | 3.55x | 4.51x | 1.07x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.40x | 7.60x | 7.46x | 1.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 27.90x | 49.48x | 38.05x | 21.68x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — HWKN and IOSP each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ECL delivers a 22.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $9 for IOSP. IOSP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ECL's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HWKN scores 6/9 vs MTX's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +12.6% | +15.9% | +22.0% | +9.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.2% | +8.4% | +8.8% | +6.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.7% | +15.9% | +12.7% | +11.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.7% | +19.3% | +15.8% | +11.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.60x | 0.35x | 0.96x | 0.07x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $717M | $155M | $8.8B | -$203M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $329M | $5M | $646M | $293M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.0B | $160M | $9.4B | $90M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 8.09x | 10.27x | 9.82x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HWKN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HWKN five years ago would be worth $49,115 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,168 for IOSP. Over the past 12 months, MTX leads with a +49.5% total return vs IOSP's -14.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HWKN at 61.2% vs IOSP's -6.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +27.4% | +15.1% | -2.0% | +0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +49.5% | +40.6% | +2.0% | -14.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +28.2% | +318.9% | +52.7% | -17.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -3.5% | +391.1% | +17.3% | -18.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +37.0% | +765.9% | +139.5% | +84.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +8.6% | +61.2% | +15.2% | -6.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MTX and ECL each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ECL is the less volatile stock with a 0.63 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HWKN's 0.98 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MTX currently trades 96.1% from its 52-week high vs IOSP's 80.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.94x | 0.98x | 0.63x | 0.70x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $80.99 | $186.15 | $309.27 | $95.55 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $52.11 | $115.35 | $249.04 | $65.58 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.1% | +89.7% | +83.0% | +80.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 71.2 | 62.9 | 46.0 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 193K | 169K | 1.4M | 221K |
Analyst Outlook
IOSP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MTX as "Buy", HWKN as "Buy", ECL as "Buy", IOSP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 50.1% upside for IOSP (target: $115) vs -12.6% for MTX (target: $68). For income investors, IOSP offers the higher dividend yield at 2.21% vs HWKN's 0.42%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $68.00 | — | $327.11 | $115.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 1 | 37 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.6% | +0.4% | +1.0% | +2.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 5 | 12 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.45 | $0.70 | $2.64 | $1.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.4% | +0.7% | +1.1% | 0.0% |
ECL leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). MTX leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
MTX vs HWKN vs ECL vs IOSP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is the stronger pick with 6. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 7% for Innospec Inc. (IOSP). Innospec Inc. (IOSP) offers the better valuation at 16. 4x trailing P/E (15. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Minerals Technologies Inc. (MTX) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP?
On trailing P/E, Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the cheapest at 16. 4x versus Hawkins, Inc. at 41. 4x. On forward P/E, Minerals Technologies Inc. is actually cheaper at 12. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Innospec Inc. wins at 0. 48x versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 1. 70x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP?
Over the past 5 years, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) delivered a total return of +391. 1%, compared to -18. 3% for Innospec Inc. (IOSP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HWKN returned +765. 9% versus MTX's +37. 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 — MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Ecolab Inc.
(ECL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 63β versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 0. 98β — meaning HWKN is approximately 57% more volatile than ECL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 96% for Ecolab Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) is pulling ahead at 6. 0% versus -3. 7% for Innospec Inc. (IOSP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innospec Inc. grew EPS 228. 9% year-over-year, compared to -111. 4% for Minerals Technologies Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HWKN leads at 8. 0% 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 — MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP?
Ecolab Inc.
(ECL) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 9% net margin versus -0. 9% for Minerals Technologies Inc. — meaning it keeps 12. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ECL leads at 18. 1% versus 8. 8% for IOSP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ECL leads at 44. 5%, 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 MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 48x versus Hawkins, Inc. 's 1. 70x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Minerals Technologies Inc. (MTX) trades at 12. 6x forward P/E versus 42. 3x for Hawkins, Inc. — 29. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IOSP: 50. 1% to $115. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Innospec Inc. (IOSP) offers the highest yield at 2. 2%, versus 0. 4% for Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN).
09Is MTX or HWKN or ECL or IOSP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Ecolab Inc.
(ECL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 63), 1. 0% yield, +139. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ECL: +139. 5%, HWKN: +765. 9%), 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 MTX and HWKN and ECL and IOSP?
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: MTX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HWKN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ECL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; IOSP is a small-cap deep-value stock. MTX, ECL, IOSP pay a dividend while HWKN does 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.