Industrial Materials
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial Materials
Industrial Materials
Chemicals - Specialty
Banks - Diversified
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Chemicals - Specialty | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $353M | $10.25B | $1.02B | $20.10B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $348M | $0.00 | $5.49B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-60M | $-71M | $-112M | $-233M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | -51.3% | 24.2% | — | 18.5% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | -55.8% | -39.4% | — | 5.6% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 247.8x | — | 14.0x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $58M | $1.04B | $166M | $3.30B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $1.17B | $568M | $1.62B | $343.34B |
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lifezone Metals Lim… (LZM) | 100 | 39.7 | -60.3% |
| MP Materials Corp. (MP) | 100 | 126.7 | +26.7% |
| Lithium Americas Co… (LAC) | 100 | 25.3 | -74.7% |
| Albemarle Corporati… (ALB) | 100 | 72.9 | -27.1% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 202.5 | +102.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LZM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 6.5%, EPS growth 71.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -28.8%
- 6.5% revenue growth vs LAC's -138.9%
MP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 475.5% 10Y total return vs JPM's 465.8%
Among these 5 stocks, LAC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ALB is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.69, Low D/E 33.7%, current ratio 2.23x
- Better valuation composite
- +176.0% vs LZM's -5.1%
JPM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
- Beta 0.94, yield 1.9%, current ratio 0.52x
- 20.4% margin vs LZM's -50.0%
- Beta 0.94 vs LZM's 2.57
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.5% revenue growth vs LAC's -138.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs LZM's -50.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.94 vs LZM's 2.57 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ALB's 0.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +176.0% vs LZM's -5.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.3% ROA vs LZM's -36.2%, ROIC 4.5% vs -13.1% |
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 4 of 6 categories
MP leads 1 • LZM leads 0 • LAC leads 0 • ALB leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and LAC operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LZM's -50.0%. On growth, LZM holds the edge at +7.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $348M | $0 | $5.5B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$64M | -$27M | -$56M | $802M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$60M | -$71M | -$112M | -$233M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$66M | -$314M | -$1.0B | $577M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -51.3% | +24.2% | — | +18.5% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -55.8% | -39.4% | — | +5.6% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -50.0% | -20.5% | — | -4.2% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -55.3% | -90.3% | — | +10.5% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.1% | +118.6% | — | +32.7% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +56.8% | +71.4% | +97.6% | — | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
JPM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, JPM's 18.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ALB's 28.9x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $353M | $10.2B | $1.0B | $20.1B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $392M | $10.1B | $613M | $21.8B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -23.12x | -115.10x | -8.92x | -29.64x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 247.85x | — | 13.98x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 28.87x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 334.25x | 37.19x | — | 3.91x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.31x | 4.09x | 0.70x | 2.05x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 29.02x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $-61 for LZM. LAC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.10x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ALB scores 6/9 vs LAC's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -60.9% | -3.5% | -8.3% | -2.3% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -36.2% | -2.0% | -5.3% | -1.4% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -13.1% | -4.7% | -5.1% | +0.6% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.8% | -4.2% | -3.1% | +0.6% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.80x | 0.44x | 0.10x | 0.34x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $38M | -$123M | -$403M | $1.7B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $1.2B | $568M | $1.6B | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $58M | $1.0B | $166M | $3.3B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -4.30x | -2.91x | — | 1.59x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MP leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,986 for LZM. Over the past 12 months, ALB leads with a +176.0% total return vs LZM's -5.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MP at 38.3% vs LAC's -29.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.3% | +4.7% | -4.6% | +19.0% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -5.1% | +97.1% | +73.0% | +176.0% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -63.3% | +164.5% | -64.4% | -19.6% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.1% | +73.0% | -46.6% | +6.0% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.1% | +475.5% | +137.0% | +137.7% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -28.4% | +38.3% | -29.1% | -7.0% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JPM is the less volatile stock with a 0.94 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LZM's 2.57 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 95.1% from its 52-week high vs LAC's 43.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.57x | 1.91x | 2.07x | 1.69x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.40 | $100.25 | $10.52 | $221.00 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.07 | $25.17 | $2.47 | $55.90 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +61.4% | +57.4% | +43.3% | +77.1% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.8 | 43.5 | 41.1 | 40.5 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 757K | 6.0M | 11.0M | 2.0M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ALB and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LZM as "Buy", MP as "Buy", LAC as "Hold", ALB as "Hold", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 78.1% upside for LZM (target: $7) vs 5.9% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, JPM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.86% vs ALB's 0.95%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $7.00 | $83.00 | $7.00 | $209.75 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 12 | 15 | 45 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +0.9% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 32 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.62 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). MP leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
LZM vs MP vs LAC vs ALB vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) is the stronger pick with 652.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 4% for Albemarle Corporation (ALB). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) 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 — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM?
On forward P/E, Albemarle Corporation is actually cheaper at 14.
0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -60. 1% for Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MP returned +475. 5% versus LZM's -60. 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 — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 94β versus Lifezone Metals Limited's 2. 57β — meaning LZM is approximately 173% more volatile than JPM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) is pulling ahead at 652.
2% versus -4. 4% for Albemarle Corporation (ALB). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lifezone Metals Limited grew EPS 71. 2% year-over-year, compared to -142. 9% for Lithium Americas Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ALB leads at -11. 1% 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 — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -1289. 2% for Lifezone Metals Limited — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus -1724. 9% for LZM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JPM leads at 59. 9%, 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 LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Albemarle Corporation (ALB) trades at 14.
0x forward P/E versus 247. 8x for MP Materials Corp. — 233. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LZM: 78. 1% to $7. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield), ALB (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. LZM, MP, LAC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LZM or MP or LAC or ALB or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 94), 1. 9% yield, +465. 8% 10Y return). Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) carries a higher beta of 2. 57 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +465. 8%, LZM: -60. 1%), 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 LZM and MP and LAC and ALB and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (LZM (Basic Materials) and MP (Basic Materials) and LAC (Basic Materials) and ALB (Basic Materials) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LZM is a small-cap high-growth stock; MP is a mid-cap high-growth stock; LAC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ALB is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. ALB, JPM pay a dividend while LZM, MP, 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.