Seek Returns logo

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

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolIFFLYB
Company NameInternational Flavors & Fragrances Inc.LyondellBasell Industries N.V.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorMaterialsMaterials
GICS IndustryChemicalsChemicals
Market Capitalization16.94 billion USD17.02 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateDecember 17, 1974April 28, 2010
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of IFF 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolIFFLYB
5-Day Price Return0.59%5.50%
13-Week Price Return-14.52%-12.77%
26-Week Price Return-23.13%-31.92%
52-Week Price Return-33.16%-44.71%
Month-to-Date Return-6.93%-8.63%
Year-to-Date Return-21.81%-28.73%
10-Day Avg. Volume2.76M7.00M
3-Month Avg. Volume1.83M4.59M
3-Month Volatility26.27%48.45%
Beta1.120.93

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

IFF

-2.80%

Chemicals Industry

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

IFF has a negative Return on Equity of -2.80%. 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.

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.

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

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

IFF

-3.48%

Chemicals Industry

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

IFF has a negative Net Profit Margin of -3.48%, indicating the company is operating at a net loss as its expenses exceeded its revenues.

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.

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

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

IFF

0.50%

Chemicals Industry

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

IFF’s Operating Profit Margin of 0.50% 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.

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.

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

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolIFFLYB
Return on Equity (TTM)-2.80%2.08%
Return on Assets (TTM)-1.39%0.73%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)-3.48%0.75%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)0.50%1.52%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)36.25%9.47%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

IFF

1.86

Chemicals Industry

Max
3.38
Q3
2.23
Median
1.73
Q1
1.39
Min
0.55

IFF’s Current Ratio of 1.86 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.

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

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

IFF

0.43

Chemicals Industry

Max
1.65
Q3
0.94
Median
0.65
Q1
0.41
Min
0.00

IFF’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.43 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.

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

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

IFF

1.73

Chemicals Industry

Max
56.43
Q3
26.33
Median
9.38
Q1
3.10
Min
-9.39

In the lower quartile for the Chemicals industry, IFF’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 1.73 indicates a tighter cushion for servicing debt, suggesting less financial flexibility than many of its competitors.

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.

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

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolIFFLYB
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.861.77
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.910.92
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.430.99
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)1.733.85

Growth

Revenue Growth

IFF 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

IFF 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)

IFF

2.43%

Chemicals Industry

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

IFF’s Dividend Yield of 2.43% is consistent with its peers in the Chemicals industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

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.

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

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

IFF

30.40%

Chemicals Industry

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

IFF’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 30.40% 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.

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

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolIFFLYB
Dividend Yield (TTM)2.43%10.84%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)30.40%152.02%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

IFF

--

Chemicals Industry

Max
42.94
Q3
29.77
Median
20.37
Q1
14.27
Min
6.19

P/E Ratio data for IFF is currently unavailable.

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.

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

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

IFF

1.49

Chemicals Industry

Max
4.36
Q3
2.23
Median
1.01
Q1
0.55
Min
0.16

IFF’s P/S Ratio of 1.49 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.

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

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

IFF

1.31

Chemicals Industry

Max
4.92
Q3
2.56
Median
1.54
Q1
0.97
Min
0.30

IFF’s P/B Ratio of 1.31 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.

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

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolIFFLYB
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)--61.71
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)1.490.46
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)1.311.56
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)27.526.27