The Sherwin-Williams Company's functional peer companies ranked by peer score — growth, valuation, profitability and stability compared.
| Comparison | SHW peer score | |
|---|---|---|
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs RPM International Inc.
|
63 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs PPG Industries, Inc.
|
66 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs Ecolab Inc.
|
66 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs Givaudan SA
|
59 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs Fuchs SE
|
80 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs Symrise AG
|
25 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs IMCD N.V.
|
39 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs CRH plc
|
65 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs Akzo Nobel N.V.
|
63 | Compare → |
|
The Sherwin-Williams Company vs Sika AG
|
39 | Compare → |
View the complete The Sherwin-Williams Company report including all peer dimensions.
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.