Seek Returns logo

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

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolCTVAMLM
Company NameCorteva, Inc.Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorMaterialsMaterials
GICS IndustryChemicalsConstruction Materials
Market Capitalization43.03 billion USD38.28 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateMay 24, 2019February 17, 1994
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of CTVA 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolCTVAMLM
5-Day Price Return-6.49%2.18%
13-Week Price Return-17.83%13.78%
26-Week Price Return0.70%32.76%
52-Week Price Return8.07%21.83%
Month-to-Date Return-6.30%0.71%
Year-to-Date Return11.25%22.90%
10-Day Avg. Volume5.96M0.33M
3-Month Avg. Volume4.48M0.40M
3-Month Volatility27.61%20.38%
Beta0.781.18

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

CTVA

5.68%

Chemicals Industry

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

CTVA’s Return on Equity of 5.68% is on par with the norm for the Chemicals industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

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.

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

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

CTVA

8.16%

Chemicals Industry

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

CTVA’s Net Profit Margin of 8.16% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Chemicals industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

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.

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

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

CTVA

13.06%

Chemicals Industry

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

CTVA’s Operating Profit Margin of 13.06% is around the midpoint for the Chemicals industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

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.

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

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolCTVAMLM
Return on Equity (TTM)5.68%11.88%
Return on Assets (TTM)3.36%6.25%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)8.16%16.47%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)13.06%23.04%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)45.65%29.44%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

CTVA

1.68

Chemicals Industry

Max
3.72
Q3
2.38
Median
1.69
Q1
1.42
Min
0.75

CTVA’s Current Ratio of 1.68 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.

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

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

CTVA

0.14

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, CTVA’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.14 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.

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

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

CTVA

4.45

Chemicals Industry

Max
56.43
Q3
26.33
Median
8.84
Q1
2.54
Min
-9.39

CTVA’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 4.45 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Chemicals industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

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.

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

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolCTVAMLM
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.682.35
Quick Ratio (MRQ)1.231.21
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.140.58
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)4.4516.36

Growth

Revenue Growth

CTVA 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

CTVA 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)

CTVA

1.08%

Chemicals Industry

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

CTVA’s Dividend Yield of 1.08% is in the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry. This suggests the company’s strategy likely favors retaining earnings for growth over providing a high dividend income.

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.

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

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

CTVA

11.80%

Chemicals Industry

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

CTVA’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 11.80% is in the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry. This suggests a conservative dividend policy, with a strategic focus on reinvesting profits for future growth.

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.

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

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolCTVAMLM
Dividend Yield (TTM)1.08%0.51%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)11.80%17.62%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

CTVA

30.82

Chemicals Industry

Max
49.43
Q3
32.03
Median
21.32
Q1
14.93
Min
8.66

CTVA’s P/E Ratio of 30.82 is within the middle range for the Chemicals industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

MLM

34.40

Construction Materials Industry

Max
33.62
Q3
19.63
Median
12.15
Q1
7.04
Min
2.32

At 34.40, 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.

CTVA 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)

CTVA

2.51

Chemicals Industry

Max
3.90
Q3
2.23
Median
1.00
Q1
0.55
Min
0.15

CTVA’s P/S Ratio of 2.51 is in the upper echelon for the Chemicals industry. This means the company is valued richly on its revenue stream compared to its peers, suggesting the stock is priced for a high level of future performance.

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.

CTVA 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)

CTVA

1.96

Chemicals Industry

Max
5.01
Q3
2.59
Median
1.50
Q1
0.95
Min
0.30

CTVA’s P/B Ratio of 1.96 is within the conventional range for the Chemicals industry. This shows a balanced market view, where the stock’s price is neither at a significant premium nor a discount to the book value of its peers.

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.

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

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolCTVAMLM
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)30.8234.40
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)2.515.67
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)1.963.53
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)8.9638.73