ALB vs. MLM: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on October 10, 2025

Here’s a clear look at ALB and MLM, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Profile

Symbol	ALB	MLM
Company Name	Albemarle Corporation	Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
Country	United States	United States
GICS Sector	Materials	Materials
GICS Industry	Chemicals	Construction Materials
Market Capitalization	10.79 billion USD	38.37 billion USD
Exchange	NYSE	NYSE
Listing Date	February 22, 1994	February 17, 1994
Security Type	Common Stock	Common Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of ALB and MLM by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period. Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

ALB vs. MLM: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

Symbol	ALB	MLM
5-Day Price Return	4.66%	1.34%
13-Week Price Return	29.52%	12.22%
26-Week Price Return	37.88%	31.21%
52-Week Price Return	-12.23%	22.69%
Month-to-Date Return	13.09%	0.96%
Year-to-Date Return	6.52%	23.20%
10-Day Avg. Volume	3.48M	0.31M
3-Month Avg. Volume	4.12M	0.38M
3-Month Volatility	63.44%	20.56%
Beta	1.47	1.18

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

ALB

-9.19%

Chemicals Industry

Max: 29.52%
Q3: 13.18%
Median: 6.53%
Q1: 1.35%
Min: -11.86%

ALB has a negative Return on Equity of -9.19%. This indicates the company is generating a loss for its shareholders, which can be a result of unprofitability or negative shareholder equity and is often a sign of financial distress.

MLM

11.88%

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 24.24%
Q3: 15.27%
Median: 10.51%
Q1: 5.28%
Min: -5.22%

MLM’s Return on Equity of 11.88% is on par with the norm for the Construction Materials industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

ALB

-18.61%

Chemicals Industry

Max: 20.20%
Q3: 9.15%
Median: 3.94%
Q1: 0.60%
Min: -10.43%

ALB has a negative Net Profit Margin of -18.61%, indicating the company is operating at a net loss as its expenses exceeded its revenues.

MLM

16.47%

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 44.75%
Q3: 22.43%
Median: 9.02%
Q1: 4.99%
Min: -4.83%

MLM’s Net Profit Margin of 16.47% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Construction Materials industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

ALB

-20.78%

Chemicals Industry

Max: 27.33%
Q3: 13.82%
Median: 7.98%
Q1: 3.60%
Min: -7.61%

ALB has a negative Operating Profit Margin of -20.78%. This signifies the company is unprofitable at the operational level, as its core business expenses exceed its revenue.

MLM

23.04%

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 31.89%
Q3: 18.90%
Median: 11.67%
Q1: 8.77%
Min: -2.06%

An Operating Profit Margin of 23.04% places MLM in the upper quartile for the Construction Materials industry. This signals a strong ability to translate revenue into operating profit, outperforming most of its competitors in core business efficiency.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

Symbol	ALB	MLM
Return on Equity (TTM)	-9.19%	11.88%
Return on Assets (TTM)	-5.44%	6.25%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)	-18.61%	16.47%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)	-20.78%	23.04%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)	7.76%	29.44%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

ALB

2.31

Chemicals Industry

Max: 3.72
Q3: 2.38
Median: 1.69
Q1: 1.42
Min: 0.75

ALB’s Current Ratio of 2.31 aligns with the median group of the Chemicals industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

MLM

2.35

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 5.14
Q3: 3.18
Median: 2.00
Q1: 1.13
Min: 0.76

MLM’s Current Ratio of 2.35 aligns with the median group of the Construction Materials industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

ALB

0.35

Chemicals Industry

Max: 1.53
Q3: 1.00
Median: 0.69
Q1: 0.41
Min: 0.00

Falling into the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry, ALB’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.35 points to a conservative financing strategy. This results in lower financial risk but potentially limits strategic investments compared to more leveraged competitors.

MLM

0.58

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 1.12
Q3: 0.82
Median: 0.61
Q1: 0.29
Min: 0.00

MLM’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.58 is typical for the Construction Materials industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

ALB

-6.46

Chemicals Industry

Max: 56.43
Q3: 26.33
Median: 8.84
Q1: 2.54
Min: -9.39

ALB has a negative Interest Coverage Ratio of -6.46. This indicates that its earnings were insufficient to cover even its operational costs, let alone its interest payments, signaling significant financial distress.

MLM

16.36

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 54.89
Q3: 34.24
Median: 7.96
Q1: 4.28
Min: -6.24

MLM’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 16.36 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Construction Materials industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

Symbol	ALB	MLM
Current Ratio (MRQ)	2.31	2.35
Quick Ratio (MRQ)	1.47	1.21
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)	0.35	0.58
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)	-6.46	16.36

Growth

Revenue Growth

ALB vs. MLM: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

ALB vs. MLM: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

ALB

3.36%

Chemicals Industry

Max: 6.59%
Q3: 3.67%
Median: 2.44%
Q1: 1.36%
Min: 0.00%

ALB’s Dividend Yield of 3.36% is consistent with its peers in the Chemicals industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

MLM

0.51%

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 6.59%
Q3: 4.78%
Median: 2.19%
Q1: 0.85%
Min: 0.00%

MLM’s Dividend Yield of 0.51% is in the lower quartile for the Construction Materials industry. This suggests the company’s strategy likely favors retaining earnings for growth over providing a high dividend income.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

ALB

192.00%

Chemicals Industry

Max: 192.00%
Q3: 108.95%
Median: 57.38%
Q1: 27.28%
Min: 0.00%

ALB’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 192.00% is in the upper quartile for the Chemicals industry. This indicates a strong commitment to shareholder returns but also suggests that a smaller portion of earnings is retained for reinvestment compared to many peers.

MLM

17.62%

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 149.16%
Q3: 76.08%
Median: 33.22%
Q1: 14.03%
Min: 0.00%

MLM’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 17.62% is within the typical range for the Construction Materials industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

Symbol	ALB	MLM
Dividend Yield (TTM)	3.36%	0.51%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)	192.00%	17.62%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

ALB

Chemicals Industry

Max: 49.43
Q3: 32.03
Median: 21.32
Q1: 14.93
Min: 8.66

P/E Ratio data for ALB is currently unavailable.

MLM

34.42

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 33.62
Q3: 19.63
Median: 12.15
Q1: 7.04
Min: 2.32

At 34.42, MLM’s P/E Ratio is exceptionally high, exceeding the typical maximum for the Construction Materials industry. This suggests the stock may be significantly overvalued compared to its peers and implies high market expectations that could be difficult to meet.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

ALB

2.13

Chemicals Industry

Max: 3.90
Q3: 2.23
Median: 1.00
Q1: 0.55
Min: 0.15

ALB’s P/S Ratio of 2.13 aligns with the market consensus for the Chemicals industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

MLM

5.67

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 3.73
Q3: 2.10
Median: 1.35
Q1: 0.67
Min: 0.21

With a P/S Ratio of 5.67, MLM trades at a valuation that eclipses even the highest in the Construction Materials industry. This implies the market has priced in exceptionally optimistic scenarios for future revenue growth, posing considerable valuation risk.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

ALB

0.72

Chemicals Industry

Max: 5.01
Q3: 2.59
Median: 1.50
Q1: 0.95
Min: 0.30

ALB’s P/B Ratio of 0.72 is in the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry. From a value investing perspective, this is favorable, as it suggests the stock is trading at a discount to its net asset value and may offer a greater margin of safety.

MLM

3.53

Construction Materials Industry

Max: 4.48
Q3: 2.26
Median: 1.26
Q1: 0.67
Min: 0.11

MLM’s P/B Ratio of 3.53 is in the upper tier for the Construction Materials industry. This indicates that investors are paying a premium relative to the company’s net assets, a valuation that hinges on its ability to generate superior profits.

ALB vs. MLM: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Chemicals and Construction Materials industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

Symbol	ALB	MLM
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)	--	34.42
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)	2.13	5.67
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)	0.72	3.53
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)	29.27	38.75