The structural profiles are close, with EMS-CHEMIE carrying a narrow edge on profitability. RPM International still has the edge on valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup broadly confirms the structural lead — EMS-CHEMIE holds the more constructive position. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — EMS-CHEMIE's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The clearest separation starts in profitability, with stability adding a second layer of support.
Both operate in: Specialty Chemicals
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. EMSN.SW and RPM share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how EMS-CHEMIE and RPM International 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.
EMS-CHEMIE HOLDING AG looks stronger, but the price setup still looks more supportive for RPM International Inc..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The profitability lead is mainly driven by a 17.1-point operating margin advantage.
Absolute pricing still looks more supportive for RPM International, with a forward P/E that is 12 turns lower there.
Profitability is the clearest driver of the lead, with valuation adding further support — though valuation still provides a real counterweight.
Break down the EMSN.SW vs RPM comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how EMSN.SW and RPM 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.