Chemicals - Specialty
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
PRM vs KWR vs KO vs JPM vs CBT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
Chemicals - Specialty
PRM vs KWR vs KO vs JPM vs CBT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $5.79B | $2.50B | $355.61B | $896.00B | $4.58B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $706M | $1.93B | $49.28B | $280.33B | $3.58B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-190M | $4M | $13.70B | $57.05B | $285M |
| Gross Margin | 56.4% | 34.4% | 61.7% | 60.0% | 24.8% |
| Operating Margin | -20.5% | 3.7% | 29.3% | 25.9% | 15.7% |
| Forward P/E | 20.3x | 20.6x | 25.3x | 14.4x | 13.9x |
| Total Debt | $34M | $929M | $45.49B | $942.38B | $1.22B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $326M | $180M | $10.27B | $343.34B | $258M |
PRM vs KWR vs KO vs JPM vs CBT — 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% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 157.5 | +57.5% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 201.9 | +101.9% |
| Cabot Corporation (CBT) | 100 | 167.0 | +67.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PRM vs KWR vs KO vs JPM vs CBT
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 is your priority.
- Rev growth 16.4%, EPS growth -32.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 21.9%
- 16.4% revenue growth vs CBT's -7.0%
- +164.1% vs KO's +17.2%
Among these 5 stocks, KWR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
KO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and dividends.
- 27.8% margin vs PRM's -26.9%
- 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- 13.1% ROA vs PRM's -6.9%, ROIC 15.8% vs -11.6%
JPM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs PRM's 195.6%
- PEG 0.81 vs KO's 2.26
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.26
CBT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.82, yield 2.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.82, Low D/E 71.3%, current ratio 1.61x
- Beta 0.82, yield 2.0%, current ratio 1.61x
- Beta 0.82 vs KWR's 1.36
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.4% revenue growth vs CBT's -7.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs PRM's -26.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.82 vs KWR's 1.36 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +164.1% vs KO's +17.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs PRM's -6.9%, ROIC 15.8% vs -11.6% |
PRM vs KWR vs KO vs JPM vs CBT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
PRM vs KWR vs KO vs JPM vs CBT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories
CBT leads 1 • PRM leads 1 • KWR leads 0 • JPM leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 397.1x PRM's $706M. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% 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 | $49.3B | $280.3B | $3.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$102M | $143M | $15.5B | $81.4B | $731M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$190M | $4M | $13.7B | $57.0B | $285M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $86M | $143M | $12.6B | $100.9B | $459M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +56.4% | +34.4% | +61.7% | +60.0% | +24.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -20.5% | +3.7% | +29.3% | +25.9% | +15.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -26.9% | +0.2% | +27.8% | +20.4% | +8.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.2% | +7.4% | +25.5% | +36.0% | +12.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +73.6% | +8.5% | +12.1% | — | -3.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +22.2% | +54.8% | +18.2% | +16.0% | -23.1% |
Valuation Metrics
CBT leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.6x trailing earnings, CBT trades at a 46% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.8B | $2.5B | $355.6B | $896.0B | $4.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.5B | $3.3B | $390.8B | $1.50T | $5.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -25.89x | -1031.86x | 27.18x | 16.00x | 14.56x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.34x | 20.59x | 25.27x | 14.40x | 13.88x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.43x | 0.90x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.03x | 26.39x | 18.36x | 7.14x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 8.86x | 1.33x | 7.42x | 3.20x | 1.23x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.66x | 1.83x | 10.40x | 2.47x | 2.79x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 27.74x | 31.07x | 67.15x | 8.88x | 11.71x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — PRM and KO and CBT each lead in 3 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 $-16 for PRM. PRM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs KWR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -16.4% | +0.3% | +41.1% | +15.9% | +16.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.9% | +0.2% | +13.1% | +1.3% | +7.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -11.6% | +6.6% | +15.8% | +4.5% | +17.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -8.3% | +7.6% | +17.3% | +8.9% | +21.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.67x | 1.33x | 2.60x | 0.71x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$292M | $749M | $35.2B | $599.0B | $957M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $326M | $180M | $10.3B | $343.3B | $258M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $34M | $929M | $45.5B | $942.4B | $1.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -5.17x | 1.41x | 10.70x | 0.74x | 14.72x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PRM leads this category, winning 4 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 KO's +17.2%. 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% | +20.3% | -0.5% | +32.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +164.1% | +22.7% | +17.2% | +21.8% | +17.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +464.8% | -25.1% | +47.0% | +138.2% | +26.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +195.6% | -36.1% | +65.6% | +118.2% | +55.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +195.6% | +77.9% | +121.1% | +465.8% | +119.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +78.1% | -9.2% | +13.7% | +33.6% | +8.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PRM and KO each lead in 1 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 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 | -0.20x | 0.94x | 0.82x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $36.01 | $183.00 | $84.04 | $337.25 | $89.46 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.05 | $111.32 | $65.35 | $262.71 | $58.33 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.5% | +78.9% | +98.3% | +95.1% | +98.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.7 | 53.5 | 60.6 | 59.1 | 57.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 151K | 12.7M | 7.0M | 382K |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PRM as "Buy", KWR as "Buy", KO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", CBT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 22.4% upside for KWR (target: $177) vs -1.9% for CBT (target: $86). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.46% vs KWR's 1.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $37.00 | $176.75 | $86.13 | $339.75 | $86.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 14 | 48 | 61 | 15 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.4% | +2.5% | +1.9% | +2.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 18 | 56 | 15 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.97 | $2.04 | $5.95 | $1.77 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.7% | +1.7% | +0.2% | +3.9% | +3.7% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). CBT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
PRM vs KWR vs KO vs JPM vs CBT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PRM or KWR or KO or JPM or CBT 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 KO or JPM or CBT?
On trailing P/E, Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the cheapest at 14.
6x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, Cabot Corporation is actually cheaper at 13. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PRM or KWR or KO or JPM or CBT?
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: JPM returned +465. 8% 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 KO or JPM or CBT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Quaker Chemical Corporation's 1. 36β — meaning KWR is approximately -781% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Perimeter Solutions, S. A. (PRM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PRM or KWR or KO or JPM or CBT?
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: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% 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 KO or JPM or CBT?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -31. 6% for Perimeter Solutions, S. A. — 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 -30. 8% for PRM. 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 PRM or KWR or KO or JPM or CBT 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Cabot Corporation (CBT) trades at 13. 9x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 11. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KWR: 22. 4% to $176. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — PRM or KWR or KO or JPM or CBT?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield), CBT (2. 0% yield), JPM (1. 9% 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 KO or JPM or CBT 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%, 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 KO and JPM and CBT?
These companies operate in different sectors (PRM (Basic Materials) and KWR (Basic Materials) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and JPM (Financial Services) and CBT (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: PRM is a small-cap high-growth stock; KWR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; CBT is a small-cap deep-value stock. KWR, KO, JPM, CBT 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.