The Clorox Company leads structurally, with profitability as the clearest single gap between the two profiles. The remaining gap is narrow enough that the comparison remains open to different readings. Both sides have seen trend damage — neither carries a clear market edge right now. With both trends damaged, the structural comparison carries most of the weight here.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Peer scores are normalised within each company's primary universe (CLX: S&P 500, HEN3.DE: STOXX 600).
Most of the visible separation comes from profitability.
Both operate in: Household & Personal Products
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. CLX and HEN3.DE share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how The Clorox Company and Henkel KGaA 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.
The Clorox Company and Henkel AG & Co. KGaA look relatively close on structure, but the price setup still leans toward The Clorox Company.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Where CLX and HEN3.DE each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.
Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.
Return on equity adds support too, with a 536-point advantage.
Stability is the one area where Henkel AG & Co. KGaA still pushes back materially — it is the steadier name on this dimension, which keeps the result from reading as one-way.
The structural lead is real, but pricing and the broader setup still stop short of a fully aligned result.
Break down the CLX vs HEN3.DE comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how CLX and HEN3.DE 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.
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.