Westlake Corporation ranks below the peer group median, with a split structural profile: strong valuation, but weak growth and profitability. The market setup has weakened, with clear trend damage and relative performance under pressure.
Peer-relative scores, weakest to strongest
Westlake Corporation is a global manufacturer of chemicals and building products, operating across vinyls, polymers, and performance materials. The company serves construction, packaging, and infrastructure markets worldwide.
ROIC at -10.69% and an operating margin of -5.40% indicate significant challenges in capital efficiency and profitability for Westlake. These negative figures show that the company is not generating returns above its cost of capital, which puts valuation support under pressure and raises concerns about business quality.
Net income remains sharply negative at -€1.5bn, while revenue growth has declined by -10.9% year-on-year, indicating that the company’s earnings base is shrinking rather than stabilizing. The stability score is 14/100, reflecting entrenched risk perceptions. Volatility at 48.6% and a max drawdown of -64.2% further demonstrate the extent of market confidence and stability risk. Recent analyst upgrades, alongside a downgrade, indicate some debate about recovery timing, but this has not resulted in a reversal of the core financial decline or a restoration of market trust.
External context complicates the picture. Mixed analyst sentiment, with both upgrades and a downgrade, reflects uncertainty about the timing and credibility of any turnaround. Sector-wide macroeconomic and regulatory pressures affect all peers but do not fully explain Westlake’s sharper underperformance. The core issue remains company-specific: a decline in profitability and capital returns that is not yet offset by sector trends.
Compared to peers, Westlake’s quality, profitability, and stability metrics are among the weakest in the group. Only Dow Inc. shows similarly low quality scores but with less severe drawdown and volatility. Most other sector names maintain higher quality and less extreme risk profiles, making Westlake’s position more severe than many peers and partly driven by factors specific to its operations and cost structure.
Improvement would require ROIC to return to positive territory and net income to move out of deep losses. Supporting factors would include stabilization of revenue growth and a reduction of volatility and drawdown toward sector norms. Until then, Westlake appears as a company with mixed valuation support and deteriorated quality.
Break down WLK's position across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
This analysis is rule-based and descriptive. Peer-relative scores are derived from functional peer group comparisons using publicly available financial data. Scores reflect structural positioning only and do not constitute investment advice, a buy or sell recommendation, or a forecast of future performance. AssetNext peer scores are recalculated periodically as new data becomes available.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.