Home Compare BNR.DE vs SIKA.SW
Stock Comparison · Industry comparison · Specialty Chemicals

Brenntag vs Sika: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

Sika holds the cleaner structural position, with profitability as the main driver and stability adding further support. Brenntag SE still has the edge on stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup is currently leaning toward Brenntag SE, which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Sika, but the market is not currently confirming it.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Both peer scores are relative to the STOXX 600 universe, making them directly comparable.

Updated 2026-07-05

The comparison is mainly decided in profitability, while stability remains the main counterforce. Sika AG leads by 9 points on the overall comparison score.

INDUSTRY COMPARISON

Both operate in: Specialty Chemicals

This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. BNR.DE and SIKA.SW share the same industry classification.

For a similarity-based comparison, see how Brenntag SE and Sika each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.

Peer-Relative Score
BNR.DE
Brenntag SE
27
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: STOXX 600
vs
SIKA.SW
Sika AG
36
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
Peer basis: STOXX 600

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

The clearest separation appears in profitability.

Dimension spread: BNR.DE vs SIKA.SW Profitability 7 48 Stability 47 14 Valuation 41 52 Growth 19 17 BNR.DE SIKA.SW
Gap Ranking
#1 Profitability +41
#2 Stability +33
#3 Valuation +11
#4 Growth +2
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for BNR.DE and SIKA.SW Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer BNR.DESIKA.SW Relative valuation Structural strength

Structure stays fairly close here, while current pricing still looks more supportive for Sika AG.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Entry today — historical context

Where BNR.DE and SIKA.SW each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY BNR.DE Lower · above norm 0th 50th 100th 13 pct gap SIKA.SW Lower · below norm 0th 50th 100th 28th 15th
BNR.DE (28th percentile) and SIKA.SW (15th percentile) sit at comparable positions within their own 5-year histories. This reflects entry timing, not which company is structurally stronger.

Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Profitability
Profitability also leans toward Sika AG, reinforcing the broader structural lead.
Stability
Stability also leans toward Brenntag SE, reinforcing the broader structural lead.
Profitability — Dominant Gap
BNR.DE
7
SIKA.SW
48
Gap+41in favour of SIKA.SW

Capital efficiency adds support, with a 5.3-point ROIC advantage.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

There is still a strong counterforce in stability, so the lead stays clear without becoming a sweep.

What this means for the comparison

Profitability settles the comparison, while pricing and stability keep the broader setup from looking fully aligned.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the BNR.DE vs SIKA.SW comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other comparisons with conflicting dimension signals

Explore how BNR.DE and SIKA.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.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

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.