Seek Returns logo

EMN vs. LYB: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolEMNLYB
Company NameEastman Chemical CompanyLyondellBasell Industries N.V.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorMaterialsMaterials
GICS IndustryChemicalsChemicals
Market Capitalization7.64 billion USD17.02 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateDecember 14, 1993April 28, 2010
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of EMN and LYB 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolEMNLYB
5-Day Price Return8.62%5.50%
13-Week Price Return-19.60%-12.77%
26-Week Price Return-34.28%-31.92%
52-Week Price Return-29.63%-44.71%
Month-to-Date Return-8.35%-8.63%
Year-to-Date Return-27.12%-28.73%
10-Day Avg. Volume2.85M7.00M
3-Month Avg. Volume1.91M4.59M
3-Month Volatility49.91%48.45%
Beta1.340.93

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

EMN

14.38%

Chemicals Industry

Max
26.17%
Q3
13.48%
Median
8.13%
Q1
2.52%
Min
-11.86%

In the upper quartile for the Chemicals industry, EMN’s Return on Equity of 14.38% signals a highly effective use of shareholder capital to drive profitability compared to most of its peers.

LYB

2.08%

Chemicals Industry

Max
26.17%
Q3
13.48%
Median
8.13%
Q1
2.52%
Min
-11.86%

LYB’s Return on Equity of 2.08% is in the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry. This indicates a less efficient generation of profit from its equity base when compared to its competitors.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

EMN

8.96%

Chemicals Industry

Max
21.80%
Q3
9.57%
Median
4.44%
Q1
1.14%
Min
-11.30%

EMN’s Net Profit Margin of 8.96% 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.

LYB

0.75%

Chemicals Industry

Max
21.80%
Q3
9.57%
Median
4.44%
Q1
1.14%
Min
-11.30%

Falling into the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry, LYB’s Net Profit Margin of 0.75% indicates weaker profitability. This means the company retains a smaller portion of each dollar in sales as profit compared to its competitors.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

EMN

12.94%

Chemicals Industry

Max
27.33%
Q3
13.97%
Median
8.08%
Q1
4.46%
Min
-8.10%

EMN’s Operating Profit Margin of 12.94% is around the midpoint for the Chemicals industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

LYB

1.52%

Chemicals Industry

Max
27.33%
Q3
13.97%
Median
8.08%
Q1
4.46%
Min
-8.10%

LYB’s Operating Profit Margin of 1.52% is in the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry. This indicates weaker profitability from core operations, which may stem from inefficiencies or competitive pressures on pricing.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolEMNLYB
Return on Equity (TTM)14.38%2.08%
Return on Assets (TTM)5.50%0.73%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)8.96%0.75%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)12.94%1.52%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)24.04%9.47%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

EMN

1.68

Chemicals Industry

Max
3.38
Q3
2.23
Median
1.73
Q1
1.39
Min
0.55

EMN’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.

LYB

1.77

Chemicals Industry

Max
3.38
Q3
2.23
Median
1.73
Q1
1.39
Min
0.55

LYB’s Current Ratio of 1.77 aligns with the median group of the Chemicals industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

EMN

0.88

Chemicals Industry

Max
1.65
Q3
0.94
Median
0.65
Q1
0.41
Min
0.00

EMN’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.88 is typical for the Chemicals industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

LYB

0.99

Chemicals Industry

Max
1.65
Q3
0.94
Median
0.65
Q1
0.41
Min
0.00

LYB’s leverage is in the upper quartile of the Chemicals industry, with a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.99. While this approach can boost equity growth, it also exposes the company to greater financial vulnerability.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

EMN

6.11

Chemicals Industry

Max
56.43
Q3
26.33
Median
9.38
Q1
3.10
Min
-9.39

EMN’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 6.11 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Chemicals industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

LYB

3.85

Chemicals Industry

Max
56.43
Q3
26.33
Median
9.38
Q1
3.10
Min
-9.39

LYB’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 3.85 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Chemicals industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolEMNLYB
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.681.77
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.780.92
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.880.99
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)6.113.85

Growth

Revenue Growth

EMN vs. LYB: 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

EMN vs. LYB: 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)

EMN

5.05%

Chemicals Industry

Max
6.56%
Q3
4.04%
Median
2.47%
Q1
1.45%
Min
0.00%

With a Dividend Yield of 5.05%, EMN offers a more attractive income stream than most of its peers in the Chemicals industry, signaling a strong commitment to shareholder returns.

LYB

10.84%

Chemicals Industry

Max
6.56%
Q3
4.04%
Median
2.47%
Q1
1.45%
Min
0.00%

LYB’s Dividend Yield of 10.84% is exceptionally high, placing it well above the typical range for the Chemicals industry. While this may seem attractive, an unusually high yield can sometimes be a warning sign, reflecting a falling stock price or market concerns about the dividend’s sustainability.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

EMN

45.67%

Chemicals Industry

Max
181.25%
Q3
95.01%
Median
53.52%
Q1
26.59%
Min
0.00%

EMN’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 45.67% is within the typical range for the Chemicals industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

LYB

152.02%

Chemicals Industry

Max
181.25%
Q3
95.01%
Median
53.52%
Q1
26.59%
Min
0.00%

LYB’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 152.02% 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.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolEMNLYB
Dividend Yield (TTM)5.05%10.84%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)45.67%152.02%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

EMN

9.04

Chemicals Industry

Max
42.94
Q3
29.77
Median
20.37
Q1
14.27
Min
6.19

In the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry, EMN’s P/E Ratio of 9.04 suggests the stock may be undervalued compared to its peers, potentially presenting an attractive entry point for investors.

LYB

61.71

Chemicals Industry

Max
42.94
Q3
29.77
Median
20.37
Q1
14.27
Min
6.19

At 61.71, LYB’s P/E Ratio is exceptionally high, exceeding the typical maximum for the Chemicals industry. This suggests the stock may be significantly overvalued compared to its peers and implies high market expectations that could be difficult to meet.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

EMN

0.81

Chemicals Industry

Max
4.36
Q3
2.23
Median
1.01
Q1
0.55
Min
0.16

EMN’s P/S Ratio of 0.81 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.

LYB

0.46

Chemicals Industry

Max
4.36
Q3
2.23
Median
1.01
Q1
0.55
Min
0.16

In the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry, LYB’s P/S Ratio of 0.46 indicates its revenue is valued more conservatively than most of its peers. This could present a compelling opportunity if the market has overlooked its sales-generating capabilities.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

EMN

1.48

Chemicals Industry

Max
4.92
Q3
2.56
Median
1.54
Q1
0.97
Min
0.30

EMN’s P/B Ratio of 1.48 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.

LYB

1.56

Chemicals Industry

Max
4.92
Q3
2.56
Median
1.54
Q1
0.97
Min
0.30

LYB’s P/B Ratio of 1.56 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.

EMN vs. LYB: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against the Chemicals industry benchmark.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolEMNLYB
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)9.0461.71
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)0.810.46
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)1.481.56
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)10.456.27