UAN vs NTR

For growth investors, CVR Partners, LP (UAN) is the stronger pick with 15.

4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 3% for Nutrien Ltd. (NTR). CVR Partners, LP (UAN) offers the better valuation at 14. 0x trailing P/E, 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, CVR Partners, LP (UAN) is the cheapest at 14.

0x versus Nutrien Ltd. at 15. 6x.

Over the past 5 years, CVR Partners, LP (UAN) delivered a total return of +268.

0%, compared to +41. 2% for Nutrien Ltd. (NTR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UAN returned +154. 5% versus NTR's +64. 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), CVR Partners, LP (UAN) is the lower-risk stock at -0.

51β versus Nutrien Ltd. 's -0. 07β — meaning NTR is approximately -86% more volatile than UAN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Nutrien Ltd. (NTR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 51% versus 2% for CVR Partners, LP — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), CVR Partners, LP (UAN) is pulling ahead at 15.

4% versus 5. 3% for Nutrien Ltd. (NTR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Nutrien Ltd. grew EPS 248. 5% year-over-year, compared to 62. 0% for CVR Partners, LP. Over a 3-year CAGR, UAN leads at -10. 2% 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.

CVR Partners, LP (UAN) is the more profitable company, earning 16.

3% net margin versus 8. 4% for Nutrien Ltd. — meaning it keeps 16. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UAN leads at 21. 4% versus 14. 5% for NTR. 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.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

CVR Partners, LP (UAN) offers the highest yield at 9. 1%, versus 3. 0% for Nutrien Ltd. (NTR).

For long-horizon retirement investors, CVR Partners, LP (UAN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.

51), 9. 1% yield, +154. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UAN: +154. 5%, NTR: +64. 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.

In terms of investment character: UAN is a small-cap high-growth stock; NTR is a mid-cap deep-value 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.