Albemarle holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across valuation and stability. DSM-Firmenich still has the edge on stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. On the market side, Albemarle is in better shape — its trend is intact while DSM-Firmenich's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Albemarle's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Most of the separation is still concentrated in valuation. Albemarle Corporation leads by 23 points on the overall comparison score.
Both operate in: Specialty Chemicals
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. ALB and DSFIR.AS share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how Albemarle and DSM-Firmenich each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
Pricing shapes this comparison more than a broad operating gap.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Albemarle Corporation looks stronger on relative valuation, while the broader price setup remains mixed.
Valuation position uses Forward P/E and peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The main spread comes from a meaningfully cheaper peer-relative valuation.
Stability still leans toward DSM-Firmenich AG, so the lead is real without reading as one-way.
Valuation settles the comparison, while pricing and stability keep the broader setup from looking fully aligned.
Break down the ALB vs DSFIR.AS comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how ALB and DSFIR.AS 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.