Build Your Comparison

Side-by-side financial analysis
NGVT logo
NGVT
FUL logo
FUL
IOSP logo
IOSP
KWR logo
KWR
CBT logo
CBT
JPM logo
JPM
Try popular comparisons:

Stock Comparison

NGVT vs FUL vs IOSP vs KWR vs CBT vs JPM

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
NGVT
Ingevity Corporation

Chemicals - Specialty

Basic MaterialsNYSE • US
Market Cap$2.54B
5Y Perf.+36.9%
FUL
H.B. Fuller Company

Chemicals - Specialty

Basic MaterialsNYSE • US
Market Cap$3.45B
5Y Perf.+42.7%
IOSP
Innospec Inc.

Chemicals - Specialty

Basic MaterialsNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$2.13B
5Y Perf.+12.1%
KWR
Quaker Chemical Corporation

Chemicals - Specialty

Basic MaterialsNYSE • US
Market Cap$2.50B
5Y Perf.-22.2%
CBT
Cabot Corporation

Chemicals - Specialty

Basic MaterialsNYSE • US
Market Cap$4.58B
5Y Perf.+136.6%
JPM
JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Banks - Diversified

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$896.00B
5Y Perf.+241.0%

NGVT vs FUL vs IOSP vs KWR vs CBT vs JPM — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
NGVT logoNGVT
FUL logoFUL
IOSP logoIOSP
KWR logoKWR
CBT logoCBT
JPM logoJPM
IndustryChemicals - SpecialtyChemicals - SpecialtyChemicals - SpecialtyChemicals - SpecialtyChemicals - SpecialtyBanks - Diversified
Market Cap$2.54B$3.45B$2.13B$2.50B$4.58B$896.00B
Revenue (TTM)$1.21B$3.47B$1.79B$1.93B$3.58B$280.33B
Net Income (TTM)$-128M$152M$114M$4M$285M$57.05B
Gross Margin39.3%31.5%27.4%34.4%24.8%60.0%
Operating Margin22.8%10.9%8.1%3.7%15.7%25.9%
Forward P/E14.6x13.5x17.9x20.6x13.9x14.4x
Total Debt$1.24B$2.02B$90M$929M$1.22B$942.38B
Cash & Equiv.$78M$107M$293M$180M$258M$343.34B

NGVT vs FUL vs IOSP vs KWR vs CBT vs JPMLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

NGVT
FUL
IOSP
KWR
CBT
JPM
StockJun 20Jun 26Return
Ingevity Corporation (NGVT)100136.9+36.9%
H.B. Fuller Company (FUL)100142.7+42.7%
Innospec Inc. (IOSP)100112.1+12.1%
Quaker Chemical Cor… (KWR)10077.8-22.2%
Cabot Corporation (CBT)100236.6+136.6%
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM)100341.0+241.0%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: NGVT vs FUL vs IOSP vs KWR vs CBT vs JPM

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: CBT and JPM are tied at the top with 2 categories each (6-stock set) — the right choice depends on your priorities. JPMorgan Chase & Co. is the stronger pick specifically for growth and revenue expansion and profitability and margin quality. NGVT, FUL, and IOSP also each lead in at least one category. This set spans 2 sectors — these stocks serve different portfolio roles, not just different price points.
NGVT
Ingevity Corporation
The Momentum Pick

NGVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.

  • +66.6% vs IOSP's +1.4%
Best for: momentum
FUL
H.B. Fuller Company
The Growth Play

FUL is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.

  • Rev growth -2.7%, EPS growth 19.6%, 3Y rev CAGR -2.5%
  • Lower P/E (13.5x vs 13.9x)
Best for: growth exposure
IOSP
Innospec Inc.
The Defensive Pick

IOSP is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.

  • Lower volatility, beta 0.70, Low D/E 6.7%, current ratio 2.79x
  • PEG 0.56 vs FUL's 4.34
  • Beta 0.70, yield 2.0%, current ratio 2.79x
  • Beta 0.70 vs KWR's 1.36, lower leverage
Best for: sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency
KWR
Quaker Chemical Corporation
The Basic Materials Pick

KWR doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.

Best for: basic materials exposure
CBT
Cabot Corporation
The Income Pick

CBT has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability.

  • Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.82, yield 2.0%
  • 2.0% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs FUL's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
  • 7.4% ROA vs NGVT's -7.3%, ROIC 17.4% vs 14.2%
Best for: income & stability
JPM
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Banking Pick

JPM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.

  • 465.8% 10Y total return vs CBT's 119.6%
  • 3.3% NII/revenue growth vs NGVT's -17.0%
  • 20.4% margin vs NGVT's -10.6%
Best for: long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthJPM logoJPM3.3% NII/revenue growth vs NGVT's -17.0%
ValueFUL logoFULLower P/E (13.5x vs 13.9x)
Quality / MarginsJPM logoJPM20.4% margin vs NGVT's -10.6%
Stability / SafetyIOSP logoIOSPBeta 0.70 vs KWR's 1.36, lower leverage
DividendsCBT logoCBT2.0% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs FUL's 1.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
Momentum (1Y)NGVT logoNGVT+66.6% vs IOSP's +1.4%
Efficiency (ROA)CBT logoCBT7.4% ROA vs NGVT's -7.3%, ROIC 17.4% vs 14.2%

NGVT vs FUL vs IOSP vs KWR vs CBT vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

NGVTIngevity Corporation
FY 2025
Performance Materials
60.2%$607M
Performance Chemicals
39.8%$401M
FULH.B. Fuller Company
FY 2025
Hygiene, Health, and Consumable Adhesives
44.7%$1.6B
Engineering Adhesives
30.6%$1.1B
Construction Adhesives
24.8%$860M
IOSPInnospec Inc.
FY 2025
Fuel Specialties
39.5%$702M
Performance Chemicals
38.3%$681M
Oilfield Services
22.2%$395M
KWRQuaker Chemical Corporation
FY 2025
Metalworking and Other
67.7%$1.3B
Metals
32.3%$611M
CBTCabot Corporation
FY 2025
Reinforcement Materials
65.2%$2.3B
Performance Chemicals
34.8%$1.3B
JPMJPMorgan Chase & Co.
FY 2025
Commercial And Investment Bank
43.0%$78.5B
Consumer & Community Banking
41.7%$76.0B
Asset and Wealth Management Segment
13.2%$24.1B
Segment Reporting, Reconciling Item, Corporate Nonsegment
3.9%$7.0B
Segment Reconciling Items
-1.7%$-3,134,000,000

NGVT vs FUL vs IOSP vs KWR vs CBT vs JPM — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLJPMLAGGINGKWR

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 231.4x NGVT's $1.2B. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NGVT's -10.6%. On growth, KWR holds the edge at +8.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricNGVT logoNGVTIngevity Corporat…FUL logoFULH.B. Fuller Compa…IOSP logoIOSPInnospec Inc.KWR logoKWRQuaker Chemical C…CBT logoCBTCabot CorporationJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …
RevenueTrailing 12 months$1.2B$3.5B$1.8B$1.9B$3.6B$280.3B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$378M$472M$187M$143M$731M$81.4B
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit-$128M$152M$114M$4M$285M$57.0B
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$246M$121M$77M$143M$459M$100.9B
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+39.3%+31.5%+27.4%+34.4%+24.8%+60.0%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+22.8%+10.9%+8.1%+3.7%+15.7%+25.9%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue-10.6%+4.4%+6.4%+0.2%+8.0%+20.4%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+20.3%+3.5%+4.3%+7.4%+12.8%+36.0%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-9.2%-3.1%+2.8%+8.5%-3.4%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+196.4%+122.2%-6.9%+54.8%-23.1%+16.0%
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

Evenly matched — FUL and IOSP each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 14.6x trailing earnings, CBT trades at a 37% valuation discount to FUL's 23.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IOSP offers better value at 0.58x vs FUL's 7.45x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricNGVT logoNGVTIngevity Corporat…FUL logoFULH.B. Fuller Compa…IOSP logoIOSPInnospec Inc.KWR logoKWRQuaker Chemical C…CBT logoCBTCabot CorporationJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …
Market CapShares × price$2.5B$3.4B$2.1B$2.5B$4.6B$896.0B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$3.7B$5.4B$1.9B$3.3B$5.5B$1.50T
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS-15.61x23.14x18.54x-1031.86x14.56x16.00x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.14.60x13.48x17.93x20.59x13.88x14.40x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate7.45x0.58x0.90x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple10.05x9.28x9.39x12.03x7.14x18.36x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue2.17x0.99x1.20x1.33x1.23x3.20x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share87.73x1.76x1.62x1.83x2.79x2.47x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF9.27x28.44x24.24x31.07x11.71x8.88x
Evenly matched — FUL and IOSP each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

CBT leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.

CBT delivers a 16.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $-156 for NGVT. IOSP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NGVT's 41.84x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FUL scores 7/9 vs KWR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricNGVT logoNGVTIngevity Corporat…FUL logoFULH.B. Fuller Compa…IOSP logoIOSPInnospec Inc.KWR logoKWRQuaker Chemical C…CBT logoCBTCabot CorporationJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …
ROE (TTM)Return on equity-156.1%+7.6%+8.6%+0.3%+16.8%+15.9%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets-7.3%+2.9%+6.3%+0.2%+7.4%+1.3%
ROICReturn on invested capital+14.2%+7.8%+11.2%+6.6%+17.4%+4.5%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+17.1%+9.2%+11.0%+7.6%+21.3%+8.9%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9676465
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage41.84x1.01x0.07x0.67x0.71x2.60x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$1.2B$1.9B-$203M$749M$957M$599.0B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$78M$107M$293M$180M$258M$343.3B
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$1.2B$2.0B$90M$929M$1.2B$942.4B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense-0.86x2.62x1.41x14.72x0.74x
CBT leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,392 for KWR. Over the past 12 months, NGVT leads with a +66.6% total return vs IOSP's +1.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs KWR's -9.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricNGVT logoNGVTIngevity Corporat…FUL logoFULH.B. Fuller Compa…IOSP logoIOSPInnospec Inc.KWR logoKWRQuaker Chemical C…CBT logoCBTCabot CorporationJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+19.8%+6.2%+14.7%+4.7%+32.1%-0.5%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+66.6%+15.2%+1.4%+22.7%+17.4%+21.8%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+33.4%+1.5%-7.8%-25.1%+26.6%+138.2%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-10.8%-0.1%-4.2%-36.1%+55.8%+118.2%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+111.0%+50.6%+105.2%+77.9%+119.6%+465.8%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+10.1%+0.5%-2.7%-9.2%+8.2%+33.6%
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — IOSP and CBT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

IOSP is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KWR's 1.36 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CBT currently trades 98.0% from its 52-week high vs KWR's 78.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricNGVT logoNGVTIngevity Corporat…FUL logoFULH.B. Fuller Compa…IOSP logoIOSPInnospec Inc.KWR logoKWRQuaker Chemical C…CBT logoCBTCabot CorporationJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5001.27x1.18x0.70x1.36x0.82x0.94x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$79.05$68.63$92.14$183.00$89.46$337.25
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$39.74$48.71$65.58$111.32$58.33$262.71
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+91.1%+92.7%+94.0%+78.9%+98.0%+95.1%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10055.758.271.753.557.059.1
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded211K483K176K151K382K7.0M
Evenly matched — IOSP and CBT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Evenly matched — FUL and CBT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: NGVT as "Buy", FUL as "Buy", IOSP as "Hold", KWR as "Buy", CBT as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 32.8% upside for IOSP (target: $115) vs -1.9% for CBT (target: $86). For income investors, CBT offers the higher dividend yield at 2.02% vs KWR's 1.36%.

MetricNGVT logoNGVTIngevity Corporat…FUL logoFULH.B. Fuller Compa…IOSP logoIOSPInnospec Inc.KWR logoKWRQuaker Chemical C…CBT logoCBTCabot CorporationJPM logoJPMJPMorgan Chase & …
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellBuyBuyHoldBuyBuyBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$76.67$68.25$115.00$176.75$86.00$339.75
# AnalystsCovering analysts13159141561
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+1.4%+2.0%+1.4%+2.0%+1.9%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises3812181415
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$0.91$1.70$1.97$1.77$5.95
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap+2.2%+1.8%0.0%+1.7%+3.7%+3.9%
Evenly matched — FUL and CBT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). CBT leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.

Best OverallJPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

NGVT vs FUL vs IOSP vs KWR vs CBT vs JPM: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT or JPM a better buy right now?

For growth investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

(JPM) is the stronger pick with 3. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -17. 0% for Ingevity Corporation (NGVT). Cabot Corporation (CBT) offers the better valuation at 14. 6x trailing P/E (13. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ingevity Corporation (NGVT) a "Buy" — based on 13 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT or JPM?

On trailing P/E, Cabot Corporation (CBT) is the cheapest at 14.

6x versus H. B. Fuller Company at 23. 1x. On forward P/E, H. B. Fuller Company is actually cheaper at 13. 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. 56x versus H. B. Fuller Company's 4. 34x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT or JPM?

Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -36. 1% for Quaker Chemical Corporation (KWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus FUL's +50. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT or JPM?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innospec Inc.

(IOSP) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 70β versus Quaker Chemical Corporation's 1. 36β — meaning KWR is approximately 96% more volatile than IOSP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innospec Inc. (IOSP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 42% for Ingevity Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT or JPM?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), JPMorgan Chase & Co.

(JPM) is pulling ahead at 3. 3% versus -17. 0% for Ingevity Corporation (NGVT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innospec Inc. grew EPS 228. 9% year-over-year, compared to -102. 2% for Quaker Chemical Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, KWR leads at -1. 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT or JPM?

JPMorgan Chase & Co.

(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -14. 3% for Ingevity Corporation — 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 8. 8% for IOSP. 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.

07

Is NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT or JPM 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. 56x versus H. B. Fuller Company's 4. 34x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, H. B. Fuller Company (FUL) trades at 13. 5x forward P/E versus 20. 6x for Quaker Chemical Corporation — 7. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IOSP: 32. 8% to $115. 00.

08

Which pays a better dividend — NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT or JPM?

In this comparison, CBT (2.

0% yield), IOSP (2. 0% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield), FUL (1. 4% yield), KWR (1. 4% yield) pay a dividend. NGVT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

09

Is NGVT or FUL or IOSP or KWR or CBT 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). Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +465. 8%, NGVT: +111. 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.

10

What are the main differences between NGVT and FUL and IOSP and KWR and CBT and JPM?

These companies operate in different sectors (NGVT (Basic Materials) and FUL (Basic Materials) and IOSP (Basic Materials) and KWR (Basic Materials) and CBT (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: NGVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FUL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IOSP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; KWR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CBT is a small-cap deep-value stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. FUL, IOSP, KWR, CBT, JPM pay a dividend while NGVT does 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.