NGVT vs ECL vs RPM vs SHW

For growth investors, Ecolab Inc.

(ECL) is the stronger pick with 2. 2% 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.

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 The Sherwin-Williams Company's 3. 91x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Ecolab Inc.

(ECL) delivered a total return of +29. 8%, compared to -10. 8% for Ingevity Corporation (NGVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SHW returned +248. 0% versus NGVT's +111. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Ecolab Inc.

(ECL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 63β versus Ingevity Corporation's 1. 27β — meaning NGVT is approximately 101% more volatile than ECL 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.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ecolab Inc.

(ECL) is pulling ahead at 2. 2% 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 -2. 7% for The Sherwin-Williams Company. 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.

Ecolab Inc.

(ECL) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 9% net margin versus -14. 3% for Ingevity Corporation — meaning it keeps 12. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NGVT leads at 22. 4% versus 12. 3% for RPM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SHW leads at 48. 9%, 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.

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 The Sherwin-Williams Company's 3. 91x. 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.

In this comparison, RPM (1.

9% yield), SHW (1. 0% yield), ECL (1. 0% yield) pay a dividend. NGVT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ECL: +139. 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.

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.

ECL, RPM, SHW 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.