NTR vs MOS

For growth investors, Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) is the stronger pick with 5. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 0% for The Mosaic Company (MOS). The Mosaic Company (MOS) offers the better valuation at 6. 1x trailing P/E (16. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Nutrien Ltd. (NTR) a "Buy" — based on 33 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, The Mosaic Company (MOS) is the cheapest at 6.

1x versus Nutrien Ltd. at 15. 6x. On forward P/E, Nutrien Ltd. is actually cheaper at 13. 0x — 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: Nutrien Ltd. wins at 0. 32x versus The Mosaic Company's 0. 93x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) delivered a total return of +41. 2%, compared to -22. 9% for The Mosaic Company (MOS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTR returned +64. 0% versus MOS's +12. 7%. 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), Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 07β versus The Mosaic Company's 0. 52β — meaning MOS is approximately -817% more volatile than NTR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Mosaic Company (MOS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 51% for Nutrien Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) is pulling ahead at 5. 3% versus 5. 0% for The Mosaic Company (MOS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Mosaic Company grew EPS 605. 5% year-over-year, compared to 248. 5% for Nutrien Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NTR leads at -10. 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.

The Mosaic Company (MOS) is the more profitable company, earning 10.

5% net margin versus 8. 4% for Nutrien Ltd. — meaning it keeps 10. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NTR leads at 14. 5% versus 9. 9% for MOS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NTR leads at 31. 0%, 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, Nutrien Ltd. (NTR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 32x versus The Mosaic Company's 0. 93x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Nutrien Ltd. (NTR) trades at 13. 0x forward P/E versus 16. 1x for The Mosaic Company — 3. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MOS: 32. 6% to $31. 25.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

The Mosaic Company (MOS) offers the highest yield at 4. 0%, versus 3. 0% for Nutrien Ltd. (NTR).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Nutrien Ltd.

(NTR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 07), 3. 0% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NTR: +64. 0%, MOS: +12. 7%), 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.

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.