Innospec vs Perimeter
IOSP and PRM side by side, both in chemicals and allied products. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How IOSP and PRM compare
Perimeter is the larger company, worth 2.6 times as much as Innospec ($5.0B against $1.9B).
Perimeter grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (30.7% versus 4.7% for Innospec).
Innospec pays a dividend yielding 2.3%; Perimeter does not pay one.
Innospec scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 7 for Perimeter), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | IOSP | PRM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.9B | $5.0B |
| Share price | $78.29 | $30.67 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.3% | 19.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −10.4% | 138% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.86 | 1.22 |
| Employees | 2,450 | 356 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 170× |
| P/S | 1.0× (better) | 6.0× |
| P/B | 1.4× (better) | 3.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.3× (better) | 26.9× |
| P/FCF | – | 93.1× |
| FCF yield | – | 1.1% |
| Fair value | $110.48 | $9.21 |
| Margin of safety | 29.1% (better) | −233% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 4.7% | 30.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.3% | 14.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −28.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −64.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 32.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 27.7% | 54.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | 8.8% | 14.5% (better) |
| Net margin | – | 6.7% |
| FCF margin | – | 6.5% |
| Return on equity | – | 4.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.4% (better) | 6.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.91 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 4.82 |
| Interest coverage | – | 1.6× |
| Current ratio | 2.95 (better) | 2.79 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.05 (better) | 1.70 |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 12 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.70% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.0% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 85.6% |
| Held by insiders | 1.6% | 22.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$902K (better) | −$435M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.9% | 5.2% |
Go deeper
- IOSP stock overview
- IOSP income statement
- IOSP valuation and score
- PRM stock overview
- PRM income statement
- PRM valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.