Chemicals - Specialty
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
NGVT vs ECL vs KO vs RPM vs PEP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Chemicals - Specialty
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
NGVT vs ECL vs KO vs RPM vs PEP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Chemicals - Specialty | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $2.54B | $74.96B | $355.61B | $13.71B | $197.17B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.21B | $16.08B | $49.28B | $7.58B | $93.92B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-128M | $2.08B | $13.70B | $667M | $8.24B |
| Gross Margin | 39.3% | 44.5% | 61.7% | 41.2% | 54.1% |
| Operating Margin | 22.8% | 17.7% | 29.3% | 12.0% | 12.2% |
| Forward P/E | 14.6x | 31.9x | 25.3x | 19.5x | 16.7x |
| Total Debt | $1.24B | $9.43B | $45.49B | $2.96B | $49.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $78M | $646M | $10.27B | $302M | $9.16B |
NGVT vs ECL vs KO vs RPM vs PEP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation (NGVT) | 100 | 136.9 | +36.9% |
| Ecolab Inc. (ECL) | 100 | 133.4 | +33.4% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| RPM International I… (RPM) | 100 | 142.6 | +42.6% |
| PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) | 100 | 109.1 | +9.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NGVT vs ECL vs KO vs RPM vs PEP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NGVT has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and momentum.
- Lower P/E (14.6x vs 16.7x)
- +66.6% vs RPM's -4.9%
ECL is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 2.2%, EPS growth -1.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.63, Low D/E 96.2%, current ratio 1.08x
- Beta 0.63 vs NGVT's 1.27, lower leverage
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 27.8% margin vs NGVT's -10.6%
- 13.1% ROA vs NGVT's -7.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs 14.2%
RPM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 142.9% 10Y total return vs ECL's 139.1%
- PEG 1.08 vs PEP's 5.11
- Beta 0.99, yield 1.9%, current ratio 2.16x
PEP ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 54 yrs, beta -0.11, yield 3.9%
- 2.3% revenue growth vs NGVT's -17.0%
- 3.9% yield, 54-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 2.3% revenue growth vs NGVT's -17.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.6x vs 16.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs NGVT's -10.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.63 vs NGVT's 1.27, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.9% yield, 54-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +66.6% vs RPM's -4.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs NGVT's -7.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs 14.2% |
NGVT vs ECL vs KO vs RPM vs PEP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NGVT vs ECL vs KO vs RPM vs PEP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories
NGVT leads 1 • ECL leads 0 • RPM leads 0 • PEP leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PEP is the larger business by revenue, generating $93.9B annually — 77.5x NGVT's $1.2B. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NGVT's -10.6%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.2B | $16.1B | $49.3B | $7.6B | $93.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $378M | $3.5B | $15.5B | $1.1B | $14.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$128M | $2.1B | $13.7B | $667M | $8.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $246M | $1.9B | $12.6B | $583M | $7.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.3% | +44.5% | +61.7% | +41.2% | +54.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +22.8% | +17.7% | +29.3% | +12.0% | +12.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -10.6% | +12.9% | +27.8% | +8.8% | +8.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +20.3% | +11.8% | +25.5% | +7.7% | +8.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -9.2% | +4.8% | +12.1% | +3.5% | +5.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +196.4% | +19.3% | +18.2% | -11.3% | +66.7% |
Valuation Metrics
NGVT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.0x trailing earnings, RPM trades at a 45% valuation discount to ECL's 36.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), RPM offers better value at 1.11x vs PEP's 7.37x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.5B | $75.0B | $355.6B | $13.7B | $197.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.7B | $83.7B | $390.8B | $16.4B | $237.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -15.61x | 36.46x | 27.18x | 20.01x | 24.05x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 14.60x | 31.92x | 25.27x | 19.48x | 16.68x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.43x | 1.11x | 7.37x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.05x | 23.36x | 26.39x | 14.88x | 16.63x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.17x | 4.66x | 7.42x | 1.86x | 2.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 87.73x | 7.72x | 10.40x | 4.75x | 9.63x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.27x | 39.36x | 67.15x | 25.47x | 25.70x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-156 for NGVT. ECL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.96x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NGVT's 41.84x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs PEP's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -156.1% | +22.0% | +41.1% | +21.3% | +40.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.3% | +8.8% | +13.1% | +8.5% | +7.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +14.2% | +12.7% | +15.8% | +13.3% | +14.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +17.1% | +15.8% | +17.3% | +15.9% | +16.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 41.84x | 0.96x | 1.33x | 1.03x | 2.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.2B | $8.8B | $35.2B | $2.7B | $40.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $78M | $646M | $10.3B | $302M | $9.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.2B | $9.4B | $45.5B | $3.0B | $49.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.86x | 9.82x | 10.70x | 8.51x | 10.34x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — ECL and KO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KO five years ago would be worth $16,560 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,915 for NGVT. Over the past 12 months, NGVT leads with a +66.6% total return vs RPM's -4.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ECL at 15.1% vs PEP's -4.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +19.8% | +1.3% | +20.3% | +4.2% | +3.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +66.6% | -1.0% | +17.2% | -4.9% | +13.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +33.4% | +52.4% | +47.0% | +35.1% | -11.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -10.8% | +29.8% | +65.6% | +27.8% | +14.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +111.0% | +139.1% | +121.1% | +142.9% | +82.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +10.1% | +15.1% | +13.7% | +10.5% | -4.1% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NGVT's 1.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs RPM's 82.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.27x | 0.63x | -0.20x | 0.99x | -0.11x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $79.05 | $309.27 | $84.04 | $129.12 | $171.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $39.74 | $243.15 | $65.35 | $92.92 | $127.60 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +91.1% | +85.8% | +98.3% | +82.9% | +84.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.7 | 56.0 | 60.6 | 59.1 | 41.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 211K | 1.4M | 12.7M | 820K | 6.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KO and PEP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NGVT as "Buy", ECL as "Buy", KO as "Buy", RPM as "Buy", PEP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 23.2% upside for ECL (target: $327) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, PEP offers the higher dividend yield at 3.86% vs ECL's 1.00%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $76.67 | $326.91 | $86.13 | $124.67 | $167.88 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 37 | 48 | 22 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.0% | +2.5% | +1.9% | +3.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 38 | 56 | 33 | 54 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.64 | $2.04 | $1.99 | $5.57 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.2% | +1.0% | +0.2% | +0.6% | +0.5% |
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NGVT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
NGVT vs ECL vs KO vs RPM vs PEP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, PepsiCo, Inc.
(PEP) is the stronger pick with 2. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -17. 0% for Ingevity Corporation (NGVT). RPM International Inc. (RPM) offers the better valuation at 20. 0x trailing P/E (19. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ingevity Corporation (NGVT) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP?
On trailing P/E, RPM International Inc.
(RPM) is the cheapest at 20. 0x versus Ecolab Inc. at 36. 5x. On forward P/E, Ingevity Corporation is actually cheaper at 14. 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: RPM International Inc. wins at 1. 08x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 11x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP?
Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +65.
6%, compared to -10. 8% for Ingevity Corporation (NGVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RPM returned +142. 9% versus PEP's +82. 3%. 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 — NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Ingevity Corporation's 1. 27β — meaning NGVT is approximately -737% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Ecolab Inc. (ECL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 96% versus 42% for Ingevity Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), PepsiCo, Inc.
(PEP) is pulling ahead at 2. 3% versus -17. 0% for Ingevity Corporation (NGVT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Ingevity Corporation grew EPS 61. 1% year-over-year, compared to -13. 7% for PepsiCo, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ECL leads at 4. 3% 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 — NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -14. 3% for Ingevity Corporation — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 12. 2% for PEP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KO leads at 61. 6%, 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 NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP 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, RPM International Inc. (RPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 08x versus PepsiCo, Inc. 's 5. 11x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Ingevity Corporation (NGVT) trades at 14. 6x forward P/E versus 31. 9x for Ecolab Inc. — 17. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ECL: 23. 2% to $326. 91.
08Which pays a better dividend — NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP?
In this comparison, PEP (3.
9% yield), KO (2. 5% yield), RPM (1. 9% yield), ECL (1. 0% yield) pay a dividend. NGVT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NGVT or ECL or KO or RPM or PEP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, NGVT: +111. 0%), 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 NGVT and ECL and KO and RPM and PEP?
These companies operate in different sectors (NGVT (Basic Materials) and ECL (Basic Materials) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and RPM (Basic Materials) and PEP (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NGVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ECL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; RPM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PEP is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. ECL, KO, RPM, PEP pay a dividend while NGVT 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.