Household & Personal Products
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
UG vs CODA vs IOSP vs MNDO vs HWKN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Aerospace & Defense
Chemicals - Specialty
Software - Application
Chemicals - Specialty
UG vs CODA vs IOSP vs MNDO vs HWKN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Household & Personal Products | Aerospace & Defense | Chemicals - Specialty | Software - Application | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $32M | $134M | $1.91B | $21M | $3.46B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $11M | $28M | $1.78B | $19M | $1.06B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $2M | $4M | $117M | $3M | $82M |
| Gross Margin | 47.7% | 66.3% | 27.7% | 51.0% | 22.9% |
| Operating Margin | 21.3% | 17.4% | 8.7% | 10.7% | 11.5% |
| Forward P/E | 15.2x | 22.5x | 15.5x | 7.8x | 42.3x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $395K | $90M | $929K | $160M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1M | $29M | $293M | $8M | $5M |
UG vs CODA vs IOSP vs MNDO vs HWKN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| United-Guardian, In… (UG) | 100 | 44.4 | -55.6% |
| Coda Octopus Group,… (CODA) | 100 | 212.5 | +112.5% |
| Innospec Inc. (IOSP) | 100 | 99.4 | -0.6% |
| MIND C.T.I. Ltd (MNDO) | 100 | 53.7 | -46.3% |
| Hawkins, Inc. (HWKN) | 100 | 778.6 | +678.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: UG vs CODA vs IOSP vs MNDO vs HWKN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
UG has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in quality and efficiency.
- 20.0% margin vs IOSP's 6.6%
- 16.3% ROA vs IOSP's 6.5%, ROIC 16.8% vs 11.2%
CODA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 30.7%, EPS growth 15.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 6.1%
- 8.4% 10Y total return vs HWKN's 7.7%
- 30.7% revenue growth vs UG's -13.4%
- +78.9% vs MNDO's -34.8%
IOSP is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.48 vs CODA's 5.24
- 2.2% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs MNDO's 21.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
MNDO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.07, yield 21.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.07, Low D/E 4.0%, current ratio 3.83x
- Beta 0.07, yield 21.6%, current ratio 3.83x
- Lower P/E (7.8x vs 42.3x)
Among these 5 stocks, HWKN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 30.7% revenue growth vs UG's -13.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.8x vs 42.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.0% margin vs IOSP's 6.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.07 vs CODA's 1.00 | |
| Dividends | 2.2% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs MNDO's 21.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +78.9% vs MNDO's -34.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.3% ROA vs IOSP's 6.5%, ROIC 16.8% vs 11.2% |
UG vs CODA vs IOSP vs MNDO vs HWKN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
UG vs CODA vs IOSP vs MNDO vs HWKN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CODA leads in 1 of 6 categories
MNDO leads 1 • UG leads 1 • IOSP leads 0 • HWKN leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CODA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IOSP is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.8B annually — 168.6x UG's $11M. UG is the more profitable business, keeping 20.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IOSP's 6.6%. On growth, CODA holds the edge at +28.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $11M | $28M | $1.8B | $19M | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2M | $6M | $198M | $2M | $172M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2M | $4M | $117M | $3M | $82M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $2M | $7M | $88M | $4M | $88M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +47.7% | +66.3% | +27.7% | +51.0% | +22.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +21.3% | +17.4% | +8.7% | +10.7% | +11.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +20.0% | +14.8% | +6.6% | +13.4% | +7.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +18.1% | +24.6% | +4.9% | +20.9% | +8.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +19.6% | +28.8% | -2.4% | -6.0% | +7.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +27.3% | +3.0% | +167.7% | -23.4% | -4.2% |
Valuation Metrics
MNDO leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.8x trailing earnings, MNDO trades at a 81% valuation discount to HWKN's 41.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IOSP offers better value at 0.51x vs CODA's 7.51x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $32M | $134M | $1.9B | $21M | $3.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $31M | $106M | $1.7B | $13M | $3.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.22x | 32.16x | 16.41x | 7.77x | 41.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 22.45x | 15.45x | — | 42.31x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 7.51x | 0.51x | — | 1.67x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.14x | 17.85x | 8.29x | 5.68x | 22.74x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.05x | 5.05x | 1.07x | 1.06x | 3.55x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.86x | 2.30x | 1.44x | 0.90x | 7.60x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 16.86x | 22.20x | 21.68x | 5.20x | 49.48x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UG leads this category, winning 4 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
UG delivers a 19.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $19 in annual profit, vs $7 for CODA. CODA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HWKN's 0.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CODA scores 7/9 vs MNDO's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +19.1% | +7.2% | +9.0% | +11.9% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +16.3% | +6.6% | +6.5% | +8.6% | +8.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +16.8% | +11.2% | +11.2% | +8.6% | +15.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +18.9% | +8.1% | +11.0% | +7.8% | +19.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.01x | 0.07x | 0.04x | 0.35x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$1M | -$28M | -$203M | -$7M | $155M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1M | $29M | $293M | $8M | $5M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $394,932 | $90M | $929,000 | $160M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | — | — | 10.27x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — CODA and HWKN each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HWKN five years ago would be worth $49,115 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,502 for MNDO. Over the past 12 months, CODA leads with a +78.9% total return vs MNDO's -34.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HWKN at 61.2% vs MNDO's -8.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +18.3% | +25.1% | +0.5% | -13.7% | +15.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -6.0% | +78.9% | -14.9% | -34.8% | +40.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -15.4% | +34.5% | -17.3% | -24.2% | +318.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -30.0% | +49.7% | -18.3% | -35.0% | +391.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -12.1% | +844.4% | +84.4% | +66.7% | +765.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -5.4% | +10.4% | -6.1% | -8.8% | +61.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MNDO and HWKN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MNDO is the less volatile stock with a 0.07 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CODA's 1.00 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HWKN currently trades 89.7% from its 52-week high vs MNDO's 61.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.33x | 1.00x | 0.70x | 0.07x | 0.98x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.88 | $17.28 | $95.55 | $1.64 | $186.15 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.58 | $5.98 | $65.58 | $0.98 | $115.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +70.9% | +68.9% | +80.2% | +61.6% | +89.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.2 | 48.6 | 59.1 | 27.4 | 62.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4K | 256K | 221K | 37K | 169K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — IOSP and MNDO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CODA as "Buy", IOSP as "Hold", HWKN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 50.1% upside for IOSP (target: $115) vs 17.6% for CODA (target: $14). For income investors, MNDO offers the higher dividend yield at 21.61% vs HWKN's 0.42%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $14.00 | $115.00 | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 1 | 9 | — | 1 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +8.6% | — | +2.2% | +21.6% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.60 | — | $1.70 | $0.22 | $0.70 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.6% | +0.7% |
CODA leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). MNDO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
UG vs CODA vs IOSP vs MNDO vs HWKN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Coda Octopus Group, Inc.
(CODA) is the stronger pick with 30. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 4% for United-Guardian, Inc. (UG). MIND C. T. I. Ltd (MNDO) offers the better valuation at 7. 8x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Coda Octopus Group, Inc. (CODA) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN?
On trailing P/E, MIND C.
T. I. Ltd (MNDO) is the cheapest at 7. 8x versus Hawkins, Inc. at 41. 4x. On forward P/E, Innospec Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 5x — 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: Innospec Inc. wins at 0. 48x versus Coda Octopus Group, Inc. 's 5. 24x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN?
Over the past 5 years, Hawkins, Inc.
(HWKN) delivered a total return of +391. 1%, compared to -35. 0% for MIND C. T. I. Ltd (MNDO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CODA returned +844. 4% versus UG's -12. 1%. 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 — UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MIND C.
T. I. Ltd (MNDO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 07β versus Coda Octopus Group, Inc. 's 1. 00β — meaning CODA is approximately 1352% more volatile than MNDO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Coda Octopus Group, Inc. (CODA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 35% for Hawkins, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Coda Octopus Group, Inc.
(CODA) is pulling ahead at 30. 7% versus -13. 4% for United-Guardian, Inc. (UG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innospec Inc. grew EPS 228. 9% year-over-year, compared to -43. 5% for MIND C. T. I. Ltd. Over a 3-year CAGR, HWKN leads at 8. 0% 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 — UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN?
United-Guardian, Inc.
(UG) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 0% net margin versus 6. 6% for Innospec Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UG leads at 21. 3% versus 8. 8% for IOSP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CODA leads at 66. 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 UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN 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, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 48x versus Coda Octopus Group, Inc. 's 5. 24x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) trades at 15. 5x forward P/E versus 42. 3x for Hawkins, Inc. — 26. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IOSP: 50. 1% to $115. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN?
In this comparison, MNDO (21.
6% yield), UG (8. 6% yield), IOSP (2. 2% yield), HWKN (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CODA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is UG or CODA or IOSP or MNDO or HWKN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, MIND C.
T. I. Ltd (MNDO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 07), 21. 6% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MNDO: +66. 7%, HWKN: +765. 9%), 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 UG and CODA and IOSP and MNDO and HWKN?
These companies operate in different sectors (UG (Consumer Defensive) and CODA (Industrials) and IOSP (Basic Materials) and MNDO (Technology) and HWKN (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: UG is a small-cap deep-value stock; CODA is a small-cap high-growth stock; IOSP is a small-cap deep-value stock; MNDO is a small-cap deep-value stock; HWKN is a small-cap quality compounder stock. UG, IOSP, MNDO pay a dividend while CODA, HWKN do 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.
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.