Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
WTMA vs ALB vs SQM vs LAC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Chemicals - Specialty
Industrial Materials
WTMA vs ALB vs SQM vs LAC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Chemicals - Specialty | Chemicals - Specialty | Industrial Materials |
| Market Cap | $21M | $23.37B | $13.08B | $1.37B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $5.49B | $4.33B | $0.00 |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-2M | $-233M | $524M | $-241M |
| Gross Margin | — | 18.5% | 27.7% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 5.6% | 21.1% | — |
| Forward P/E | — | 22.4x | 15.0x | — |
| Total Debt | $4M | $3.30B | $4.82B | $23M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1K | $1.62B | $1.38B | $594M |
WTMA vs ALB vs SQM vs LAC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 22 | Jan 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Welsbach Technology… (WTMA) | 100 | 76.6 | -23.4% |
| Albemarle Corporati… (ALB) | 100 | 64.1 | -35.9% |
| Sociedad Química y … (SQM) | 100 | 127.1 | +27.1% |
| Lithium Americas Co… (LAC) | 100 | 26.9 | -73.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: WTMA vs ALB vs SQM vs LAC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
WTMA plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
ALB is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 1.60, yield 0.8%
- Rev growth -4.4%, EPS growth 48.7%, 3Y rev CAGR -11.1%
- -4.4% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0%
- 0.8% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs SQM's 0.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
SQM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and defensive.
- 464.6% 10Y total return vs ALB's 217.0%
- Beta 1.24, yield 0.3%, current ratio 2.51x
- Better valuation composite
- 12.1% margin vs ALB's -4.2%
LAC is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.42, Low D/E 2.4%, current ratio 10.33x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | -4.4% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.1% margin vs ALB's -4.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.24 vs ALB's 1.60 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs SQM's 0.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +256.7% vs WTMA's -25.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.5% ROA vs WTMA's -32.4%, ROIC 9.0% vs -176.8% |
WTMA vs ALB vs SQM vs LAC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
WTMA vs ALB vs SQM vs LAC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SQM leads in 4 of 6 categories
ALB leads 1 • WTMA leads 0 • LAC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SQM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALB and LAC operate at a comparable scale, with $5.5B and $0 in trailing revenue. SQM is the more profitable business, keeping 12.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ALB's -4.2%. On growth, ALB holds the edge at +32.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $5.5B | $4.3B | $0 |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$2M | $802M | $917M | -$32M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$2M | -$233M | $524M | -$241M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2M | $577M | $66M | -$648M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +18.5% | +27.7% | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +5.6% | +21.1% | — |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -4.2% | +12.1% | — |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +10.5% | +1.5% | — |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +32.7% | +8.9% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.7% | — | +34.8% | -21.4% |
Valuation Metrics
SQM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, SQM's 15.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ALB's 33.2x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $21M | $23.4B | $13.1B | $1.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $25M | $25.1B | $16.5B | $801M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 0.00x | -34.50x | -64.51x | -26.95x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 22.36x | 15.04x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 33.21x | 15.43x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 4.55x | 2.89x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 2.39x | 5.02x | 1.20x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 33.76x | 43.19x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SQM leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SQM delivers a 9.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $-134 for WTMA. WTMA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SQM's 0.93x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ALB scores 6/9 vs LAC's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -134.0% | -2.3% | +9.5% | -26.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -32.4% | -1.4% | +4.5% | -16.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -176.8% | +0.6% | +9.0% | -7.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -78.2% | +0.6% | +11.4% | -3.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.34x | 0.93x | 0.02x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4M | $1.7B | $3.4B | -$571M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1,185 | $1.6B | $1.4B | $594M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4M | $3.3B | $4.8B | $23M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 1.59x | 5.37x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
SQM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SQM five years ago would be worth $19,418 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,869 for LAC. Over the past 12 months, ALB leads with a +256.7% total return vs WTMA's -25.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors SQM at 12.0% vs LAC's -23.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -36.6% | +38.1% | +31.4% | +18.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -25.5% | +256.7% | +173.2% | +84.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -18.4% | +9.3% | +40.7% | -55.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -13.2% | +26.8% | +94.2% | -31.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -13.2% | +217.0% | +464.6% | +234.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -6.6% | +3.0% | +12.0% | -23.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WTMA and SQM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WTMA is the less volatile stock with a -1.45 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ALB's 1.60 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SQM currently trades 93.5% from its 52-week high vs WTMA's 30.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -1.45x | 1.60x | 1.24x | 1.42x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.37 | $221.00 | $98.00 | $10.52 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.50 | $53.70 | $29.36 | $2.47 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +30.8% | +89.8% | +93.5% | +53.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.8 | 53.0 | 61.5 | 69.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 18K | 2.0M | 1.3M | 9.0M |
Analyst Outlook
ALB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ALB as "Hold", SQM as "Hold", LAC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 23.7% upside for LAC (target: $7) vs -17.6% for SQM (target: $76). For income investors, ALB offers the higher dividend yield at 0.82% vs SQM's 0.26%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $190.80 | $75.50 | $7.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 45 | 16 | 15 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.8% | +0.3% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 15 | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.62 | $0.24 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +57.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
SQM leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ALB leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
WTMA vs ALB vs SQM vs LAC: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WTMA or ALB or SQM or LAC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) is the stronger pick with -4.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). Analysts rate Albemarle Corporation (ALB) a "Hold" — based on 45 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 is the better long-term investment — WTMA or ALB or SQM or LAC?
Over the past 5 years, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) delivered a total return of +94. 2%, compared to -31. 3% for Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SQM returned +464. 6% versus WTMA's -13. 2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — WTMA or ALB or SQM or LAC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Welsbach Technology Metals Acquisition Corp.
(WTMA) is the lower-risk stock at -1. 45β versus Albemarle Corporation's 1. 60β — meaning ALB is approximately -210% more volatile than WTMA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Welsbach Technology Metals Acquisition Corp. (WTMA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 93% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — WTMA or ALB or SQM or LAC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Albemarle Corporation (ALB) is pulling ahead at -4.
4% versus -39. 4% for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S. A. (SQM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Albemarle Corporation grew EPS 48. 7% year-over-year, compared to -757. 1% for Lithium Americas Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SQM leads at 16. 5% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — WTMA or ALB or SQM or LAC?
Welsbach Technology Metals Acquisition Corp.
(WTMA) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -9. 9% for Albemarle Corporation — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SQM leads at 23. 5% versus 0. 0% for LAC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SQM leads at 29. 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.
06Is WTMA or ALB or SQM or LAC more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.
A. (SQM) trades at 15. 0x forward P/E versus 22. 4x for Albemarle Corporation — 7. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LAC: 23. 7% to $7. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — WTMA or ALB or SQM or LAC?
In this comparison, ALB (0.
8% yield), SQM (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. WTMA, LAC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is WTMA or ALB or SQM or LAC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Welsbach Technology Metals Acquisition Corp.
(WTMA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -1. 45)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WTMA: -13. 2%, LAC: +234. 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.
09What are the main differences between WTMA and ALB and SQM and LAC?
These companies operate in different sectors (WTMA (Financial Services) and ALB (Basic Materials) and SQM (Basic Materials) and LAC (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
ALB pays a dividend while WTMA, SQM, LAC 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.