Chemicals - Specialty
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TSE vs LIN vs APD vs EMN vs ALB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
TSE vs LIN vs APD vs EMN vs ALB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $5M | $228.85B | $65.68B | $8.43B | $23.37B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.13B | $34.66B | $12.46B | $8.64B | $5.49B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-412M | $7.13B | $2.11B | $399M | $-233M |
| Gross Margin | 6.2% | 46.0% | 32.0% | 19.8% | 18.5% |
| Operating Margin | -4.3% | 28.8% | 18.4% | 9.4% | 5.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 27.7x | 22.5x | 12.5x | 22.4x |
| Total Debt | $2.48B | $26.99B | $18.41B | $5.08B | $3.30B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $210M | $5.06B | $1.86B | $566M | $1.62B |
TSE vs LIN vs APD vs EMN vs ALB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | Mar 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trinseo PLC (TSE) | 100 | 0.6 | -99.4% |
| Linde plc (LIN) | 100 | 251.1 | +151.1% |
| Air Products and Ch… (APD) | 100 | 114.1 | +14.1% |
| Eastman Chemical Co… (EMN) | 100 | 110.9 | +10.9% |
| Albemarle Corporati… (ALB) | 100 | 233.5 | +133.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TSE vs LIN vs APD vs EMN vs ALB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TSE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if dividends is your priority.
- 38.5% yield, vs APD's 2.4%
LIN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 3.0%, EPS growth 7.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.6%
- 375.2% 10Y total return vs ALB's 217.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.24, Low D/E 67.9%, current ratio 0.88x
- PEG 1.09 vs EMN's 3.89
APD is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 29 yrs, beta 0.45, yield 2.4%
- Beta 0.45, yield 2.4%, current ratio 1.38x
EMN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (12.5x vs 22.4x)
ALB is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +256.7% vs TSE's -96.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.0% revenue growth vs EMN's -6.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.5x vs 22.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.6% margin vs TSE's -13.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.24 vs TSE's 2.94 | |
| Dividends | 38.5% yield, vs APD's 2.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +256.7% vs TSE's -96.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.3% ROA vs TSE's -15.8%, ROIC 11.3% vs -2.0% |
TSE vs LIN vs APD vs EMN vs ALB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TSE vs LIN vs APD vs EMN vs ALB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LIN leads in 3 of 6 categories
EMN leads 1 • TSE leads 0 • APD leads 0 • ALB leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LIN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LIN is the larger business by revenue, generating $34.7B annually — 11.1x TSE's $3.1B. LIN is the more profitable business, keeping 20.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TSE's -13.2%. On growth, ALB holds the edge at +32.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.1B | $34.7B | $12.5B | $8.6B | $5.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $88M | $12.1B | $3.9B | $1.2B | $802M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$412M | $7.1B | $2.1B | $399M | -$233M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$96M | $5.1B | $1.1B | $498M | $577M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +6.2% | +46.0% | +32.0% | +19.8% | +18.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -4.3% | +28.8% | +18.4% | +9.4% | +5.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.2% | +20.6% | +16.9% | +4.6% | -4.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -3.1% | +14.7% | +8.9% | +5.8% | +10.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.3% | +8.2% | +8.8% | -4.9% | +32.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -23.5% | +13.4% | +141.1% | -40.8% | — |
Valuation Metrics
EMN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 18.0x trailing earnings, EMN trades at a 47% valuation discount to LIN's 33.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), LIN offers better value at 1.33x vs EMN's 5.59x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5M | $228.8B | $65.7B | $8.4B | $23.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.3B | $250.8B | $82.2B | $12.9B | $25.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.01x | 33.85x | -166.67x | 17.97x | -34.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 27.67x | 22.46x | 12.50x | 22.36x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.33x | — | 5.59x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.84x | 19.75x | 119.66x | 8.96x | 33.21x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.00x | 6.73x | 5.46x | 0.96x | 4.55x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 5.82x | 3.79x | 1.41x | 2.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 44.97x | — | 19.87x | 33.76x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LIN leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LIN delivers a 17.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $-2 for ALB. ALB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.34x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to APD's 1.06x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LIN scores 6/9 vs APD's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +17.8% | +11.9% | +6.7% | -2.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -15.8% | +8.3% | +5.1% | +2.6% | -1.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.0% | +11.3% | -2.0% | +6.7% | +0.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.1% | +13.0% | -2.4% | +7.5% | +0.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.68x | 1.06x | 0.84x | 0.34x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.3B | $21.9B | $16.6B | $4.5B | $1.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $210M | $5.1B | $1.9B | $566M | $1.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.5B | $27.0B | $18.4B | $5.1B | $3.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.43x | 34.52x | 12.00x | 2.22x | 1.59x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LIN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LIN five years ago would be worth $17,394 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $346 for TSE. Over the past 12 months, ALB leads with a +256.7% total return vs TSE's -96.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LIN at 11.8% vs TSE's -76.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -80.6% | +15.5% | +19.2% | +15.8% | +38.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -96.9% | +11.2% | +14.2% | +2.3% | +256.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.7% | +39.7% | +7.0% | +3.4% | +9.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -96.5% | +73.9% | +13.2% | -28.4% | +26.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.8% | +375.2% | +166.4% | +35.4% | +217.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -76.4% | +11.8% | +2.3% | +1.1% | +3.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LIN and APD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LIN is the less volatile stock with a 0.24 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TSE's 2.94 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. APD currently trades 96.0% from its 52-week high vs TSE's 2.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.94x | 0.24x | 0.45x | 1.36x | 1.60x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.42 | $521.28 | $307.29 | $84.18 | $221.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.06 | $387.78 | $229.11 | $56.11 | $53.70 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +2.8% | +94.7% | +96.0% | +87.5% | +89.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 39.2 | 51.7 | 55.0 | 56.9 | 53.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 629K | 2.3M | 1.2M | 1.5M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TSE and APD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LIN as "Buy", APD as "Buy", EMN as "Buy", ALB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 9.3% upside for LIN (target: $540) vs -3.8% for ALB (target: $191). For income investors, TSE offers the higher dividend yield at 38.53% vs ALB's 0.82%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $539.71 | $312.78 | $77.29 | $190.80 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 28 | 42 | 35 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +38.5% | +1.2% | +2.4% | +4.5% | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 6 | 29 | 12 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.05 | $6.00 | $7.11 | $3.30 | $1.62 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.0% | 0.0% | +1.2% | 0.0% |
LIN leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). EMN leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
TSE vs LIN vs APD vs EMN vs ALB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Linde plc (LIN) is the stronger pick with 3.
0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 7% for Eastman Chemical Company (EMN). Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) offers the better valuation at 18. 0x trailing P/E (12. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Linde plc (LIN) a "Buy" — based on 28 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 — TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB?
On trailing P/E, Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) is the cheapest at 18.
0x versus Linde plc at 33. 8x. On forward P/E, Eastman Chemical Company is actually cheaper at 12. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Linde plc wins at 1. 09x versus Eastman Chemical Company's 3. 89x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB?
Over the past 5 years, Linde plc (LIN) delivered a total return of +73.
9%, compared to -96. 5% for Trinseo PLC (TSE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LIN returned +375. 2% versus TSE's -79. 8%. 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 — TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Linde plc (LIN) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
24β versus Trinseo PLC's 2. 94β — meaning TSE is approximately 1121% more volatile than LIN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 34% versus 106% for Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Linde plc (LIN) is pulling ahead at 3.
0% versus -6. 7% for Eastman Chemical Company (EMN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Trinseo PLC grew EPS 50. 3% year-over-year, compared to -110. 3% for Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LIN leads at 0. 6% 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 — TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB?
Linde plc (LIN) is the more profitable company, earning 20.
3% net margin versus -9. 9% for Albemarle Corporation — meaning it keeps 20. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LIN leads at 26. 3% versus -7. 3% for APD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LIN leads at 43. 3%, 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 TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB 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, Linde plc (LIN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 09x versus Eastman Chemical Company's 3. 89x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) trades at 12. 5x forward P/E versus 27. 7x for Linde plc — 15. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LIN: 9. 3% to $539. 71.
08Which pays a better dividend — TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Trinseo PLC (TSE) offers the highest yield at 38. 5%, versus 0. 8% for Albemarle Corporation (ALB).
09Is TSE or LIN or APD or EMN or ALB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Linde plc (LIN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
24), 1. 2% yield, +375. 2% 10Y return). Trinseo PLC (TSE) carries a higher beta of 2. 94 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LIN: +375. 2%, TSE: -79. 8%), 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 TSE and LIN and APD and EMN and ALB?
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: TSE is a small-cap income-oriented stock; LIN is a large-cap quality compounder stock; APD is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; EMN is a small-cap deep-value stock; ALB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.