Chemicals - Specialty
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
PRM vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
PRM vs KWR vs CBT 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 | $5.79B | $2.50B | $4.58B | $2.13B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $706M | $1.93B | $3.58B | $1.79B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-190M | $4M | $285M | $114M |
| Gross Margin | 56.4% | 34.4% | 24.8% | 27.4% |
| Operating Margin | -20.5% | 3.7% | 15.7% | 8.1% |
| Forward P/E | 20.3x | 20.6x | 13.9x | 17.9x |
| Total Debt | $34M | $929M | $1.22B | $90M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $326M | $180M | $258M | $293M |
PRM vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Perimeter Solutions… (PRM) | 100 | 301.9 | +201.9% |
| Quaker Chemical Cor… (KWR) | 100 | 63.4 | -36.6% |
| Cabot Corporation (CBT) | 100 | 167.0 | +67.0% |
| Innospec Inc. (IOSP) | 100 | 106.6 | +6.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PRM vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PRM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 16.4%, EPS growth -32.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 21.9%
- 195.6% 10Y total return vs CBT's 119.6%
- 16.4% revenue growth vs CBT's -7.0%
- +164.1% vs IOSP's +1.4%
KWR lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
CBT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.82, yield 2.0%
- Lower P/E (13.9x vs 17.9x)
- 8.0% margin vs PRM's -26.9%
- 2.0% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs KWR's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
IOSP is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, Low D/E 6.7%, current ratio 2.79x
- Beta 0.70, yield 2.0%, current ratio 2.79x
- Beta 0.70 vs KWR's 1.36, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.4% revenue growth vs CBT's -7.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.9x vs 17.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.0% margin vs PRM's -26.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs KWR's 1.36, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.0% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs KWR's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +164.1% vs IOSP's +1.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.4% ROA vs PRM's -6.9%, ROIC 17.4% vs -11.6% |
PRM vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
PRM vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CBT leads in 3 of 6 categories
PRM leads 1 • KWR leads 0 • IOSP leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CBT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CBT is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.6B annually — 5.1x PRM's $706M. CBT is the more profitable business, keeping 8.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PRM's -26.9%. On growth, PRM holds the edge at +73.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $706M | $1.9B | $3.6B | $1.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$102M | $143M | $731M | $187M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$190M | $4M | $285M | $114M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $86M | $143M | $459M | $77M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +56.4% | +34.4% | +24.8% | +27.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -20.5% | +3.7% | +15.7% | +8.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -26.9% | +0.2% | +8.0% | +6.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.2% | +7.4% | +12.8% | +4.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +73.6% | +8.5% | -3.4% | +2.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +22.2% | +54.8% | -23.1% | -6.9% |
Valuation Metrics
CBT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.6x trailing earnings, CBT trades at a 21% valuation discount to IOSP's 18.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CBT's 7.1x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KWR's 12.0x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.8B | $2.5B | $4.6B | $2.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.5B | $3.3B | $5.5B | $1.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -25.89x | -1031.86x | 14.56x | 18.54x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.34x | 20.59x | 13.88x | 17.93x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.58x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.03x | 7.14x | 9.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 8.86x | 1.33x | 1.23x | 1.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.66x | 1.83x | 2.79x | 1.62x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 27.74x | 31.07x | 11.71x | 24.24x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CBT leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CBT delivers a 16.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $-16 for PRM. PRM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CBT's 0.71x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CBT scores 6/9 vs KWR's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -16.4% | +0.3% | +16.8% | +8.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.9% | +0.2% | +7.4% | +6.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -11.6% | +6.6% | +17.4% | +11.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -8.3% | +7.6% | +21.3% | +11.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.67x | 0.71x | 0.07x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$292M | $749M | $957M | -$203M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $326M | $180M | $258M | $293M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $34M | $929M | $1.2B | $90M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -5.17x | 1.41x | 14.72x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PRM leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PRM five years ago would be worth $29,558 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,392 for KWR. Over the past 12 months, PRM leads with a +164.1% total return vs IOSP's +1.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRM at 78.1% vs KWR's -9.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +28.9% | +4.7% | +32.1% | +14.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +164.1% | +22.7% | +17.4% | +1.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +464.8% | -25.1% | +26.6% | -7.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +195.6% | -36.1% | +55.8% | -4.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +195.6% | +77.9% | +119.6% | +105.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +78.1% | -9.2% | +8.2% | -2.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PRM and IOSP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IOSP is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KWR's 1.36 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PRM currently trades 98.5% from its 52-week high vs KWR's 78.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.09x | 1.36x | 0.82x | 0.70x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $36.01 | $183.00 | $89.46 | $92.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.05 | $111.32 | $58.33 | $65.58 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.5% | +78.9% | +98.0% | +94.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.7 | 53.5 | 57.0 | 71.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 151K | 382K | 176K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KWR and CBT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PRM as "Buy", KWR as "Buy", CBT as "Buy", IOSP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 32.8% upside for IOSP (target: $115) vs -1.9% for CBT (target: $86). For income investors, CBT offers the higher dividend yield at 2.02% vs KWR's 1.36%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $37.00 | $176.75 | $86.00 | $115.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 14 | 15 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.4% | +2.0% | +2.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 18 | 14 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.97 | $1.77 | $1.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | +1.7% | +3.7% | 0.0% |
CBT leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). PRM leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
PRM vs KWR vs CBT vs IOSP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Perimeter Solutions, S.
A. (PRM) is the stronger pick with 16. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 0% for Cabot Corporation (CBT). Cabot Corporation (CBT) offers the better valuation at 14. 6x trailing P/E (13. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Perimeter Solutions, S. A. (PRM) 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 — PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
On trailing P/E, Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the cheapest at 14.
6x versus Innospec Inc. at 18. 5x. On forward P/E, Cabot Corporation is actually cheaper at 13. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
Over the past 5 years, Perimeter Solutions, S.
A. (PRM) delivered a total return of +195. 6%, compared to -36. 1% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PRM returned +195. 6% versus KWR's +77. 9%. 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 — PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 70β versus Quaker Chemical Corporation's 1. 36β — meaning KWR is approximately 96% more volatile than IOSP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Perimeter Solutions, S. A. (PRM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 71% for Cabot Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Perimeter Solutions, S.
A. (PRM) is pulling ahead at 16. 4% versus -7. 0% for Cabot Corporation (CBT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innospec Inc. grew EPS 228. 9% year-over-year, compared to -32. 8% for Perimeter Solutions, S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PRM leads at 21. 9% 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 — PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
9% net margin versus -31. 6% for Perimeter Solutions, S. A. — meaning it keeps 8. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CBT leads at 16. 7% versus -30. 8% for PRM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PRM leads at 57. 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 PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Cabot Corporation (CBT) trades at 13.
9x forward P/E versus 20. 6x for Quaker Chemical Corporation — 6. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IOSP: 32. 8% to $115. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP?
In this comparison, CBT (2.
0% yield), IOSP (2. 0% yield), KWR (1. 4% yield) pay a dividend. PRM does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is PRM or KWR or CBT or IOSP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Innospec Inc.
(IOSP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 70), 2. 0% yield, +105. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IOSP: +105. 2%, PRM: +195. 6%), 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 PRM and KWR and CBT 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: PRM is a small-cap high-growth stock; KWR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CBT is a small-cap deep-value stock; IOSP is a small-cap quality compounder stock. KWR, CBT, IOSP pay a dividend while PRM 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.