Albemarle vs Celanese
ALB and CE 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 ALB and CE compare
Albemarle is the larger company, worth 2.0 times as much as Celanese ($11.3B against $5.6B).
Albemarle grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.4% versus −2.2% for Celanese).
Albemarle keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.1% compared with −12.0% at Celanese.
Both pay dividends: Albemarle yields 1.7% and Celanese 0.17%.
Albemarle scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 7 for Celanese), 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 | ALB | CE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $11.3B | $5.6B |
| Share price | $95.97 | $51.45 |
| Change, 1 year | −7.3% | 24.6% |
| Change, 5 years | −65.9% | −69.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.64 | 1.12 |
| Employees | 7,800 | 11K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.2× | – |
| P/S | 1.8× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 1.1× (better) | 1.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 9.2× (better) | 117× |
| P/FCF | 7.8× (better) | 8.0× |
| FCF yield | 12.8% (better) | 12.5% |
| Fair value | $150.87 | $87.24 |
| Margin of safety | 36.4% | 41.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 24.4% (better) | −2.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.4% | 11.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 25.8% (better) | 20.9% |
| Operating margin | 10.0% (better) | −7.1% |
| Net margin | 11.1% (better) | −12.0% |
| FCF margin | 23.5% (better) | 7.3% |
| Return on equity | 6.6% (better) | −24.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 2.8% (better) | −3.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.18 (better) | 2.88 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.03 (better) | 74.43 |
| Interest coverage | – | −1.0× |
| Current ratio | 2.34 (better) | 1.45 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.45 (better) | 1.31 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.7% (better) | 0.17% |
| Payout ratio | 28.0% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 1.0% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.7% (better) | 0.17% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 98.3% | 111% |
| Held by insiders | 0.35% | 0.41% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$7.4M | $593K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.5% | 5.6% |
Go deeper
- ALB stock overview
- ALB income statement
- ALB valuation and score
- CE stock overview
- CE income statement
- CE valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.