The structural profiles are close, with Air Products and Chemicals carrying a narrow edge on growth. Givaudan still has the edge on profitability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup broadly confirms the structural lead — Air Products and Chemicals holds the more constructive position. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Air Products and Chemicals's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Most of the lead runs through growth, while profitability acts as a real counterweight.
Both operate in: Specialty Chemicals
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. APD and GIVN.SW share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how APD and Givaudan each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Givaudan SA and Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. look relatively close on structure, but the price setup still leans toward Givaudan SA.
Valuation position uses Forward P/E and peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
One company is still expanding while the other is contracting, which creates a very wide growth split.
Capital efficiency also runs the other way, with a 14.7-point ROIC edge acting as a real counterforce.
Growth gives Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. the clearer edge, even though profitability and the price setup keep the overall picture from looking clean.
Break down the APD vs GIVN.SW comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how APD and GIVN.SW each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
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.
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.