Ingevity vs Perimeter
NGVT 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 NGVT and PRM compare
Perimeter is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as Ingevity ($4.8B against $2.1B).
On earnings, Ingevity is cheaper: it trades at 36.3× trailing earnings, against 163× for Perimeter.
Perimeter grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (30.7% versus −3.7% for Ingevity).
Perimeter keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.7% compared with 5.3% at Ingevity.
Perimeter scores higher on the StockData Score (7 against 6 for Ingevity), 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 | NGVT | PRM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $2.1B | $4.8B |
| Share price | $61.72 | $29.36 |
| Change, 1 year | 25.6% | 11.5% |
| Change, 5 years | −21.7% | 128% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.21 | 1.22 |
| Employees | 1,500 | 356 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 36.3× (better) | 163× |
| P/S | 1.9× (better) | 5.8× |
| P/B | 33.7× | 3.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 23.1× (better) | 26.0× |
| P/FCF | 17.3× (better) | 89.1× |
| FCF yield | 5.8% (better) | 1.1% |
| Fair value | $35.71 | $9.12 |
| Margin of safety | −72.8% (better) | −222% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −3.7% | 30.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −0.81% | 14.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −28.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −64.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 42.0% | 54.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | – | 14.5% |
| Net margin | 5.3% | 6.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | 10.8% (better) | 6.5% |
| Return on equity | 59.5% (better) | 4.6% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 6.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 18.18 | 0.91 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 7.68 | 4.82 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 1.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.48 | 2.79 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.29 (better) | 1.64 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 7.4% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 7.4% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 102% | 85.6% |
| Held by insiders | 1.4% | 22.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$1.8M (better) | −$435M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.7% | 5.2% |
Go deeper
- NGVT stock overview
- NGVT income statement
- NGVT 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.