EMN vs. ALB
EMN (Eastman Chemical Company) and ALB (Albemarle Corporation) are both stocks. Both are in the Basic Materials sector — EMN in Chemicals, ALB in Specialty Chemicals. Over the past 10 years, EMN returned 4.31%/yr vs 4.77%/yr for ALB. Their 0.48 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.
Performance
EMN vs. ALB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMN achieves a 12.16% return, which is significantly higher than ALB's -16.41% return. Over the past 10 years, EMN has underperformed ALB with an annualized return of 4.31%, while ALB has yielded a comparatively higher 4.77% annualized return.
EMN
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.58%
- 6M
- 3.28%
- YTD
- 12.16%
- 1Y
- 24.91%
- 3Y*
- -2.72%
- 5Y*
- -5.65%
- 10Y*
- 4.31%
- ALL TIME*
- 7.08%
ALB
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -13.22%
- 6M
- -30.71%
- YTD
- -16.41%
- 1Y
- 75.60%
- 3Y*
- -16.02%
- 5Y*
- -9.53%
- 10Y*
- 4.77%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.63%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $278.16M | $258.77M | $355.35M | |
| $97.27M | $86.88M | $86.83M |
EMN vs. ALB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMN Eastman Chemical Company | 12.16% | -26.87% | 5.11% | 14.66% | -30.38% | 23.54% | 31.78% | 12.01% | -19.10% | 26.28% |
ALB Albemarle Corporation | -16.41% | 67.72% | -39.50% | -32.80% | -6.63% | 59.76% | 105.39% | -3.28% | -38.89% | 50.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMN and ALB is 0.23, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.45 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 1994 | 0.48 |
Over the past year, the correlation between EMN and ALB has dropped to 0.23 - well below their long-term average of 0.48, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
Fundamentals
EMN:
$8.00B
ALB:
$13.87B
EMN:
$3.84
ALB:
-$2.33
EMN:
0.91
ALB:
2.53
EMN:
1.32
ALB:
1.83
EMN:
$8.87B
ALB:
$5.49B
EMN:
$1.76B
ALB:
$1.02B
EMN:
$1.27B
ALB:
$801.97M
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
EMN vs. ALB — Risk / Return Rank
EMN
ALB
EMN vs. ALB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) and Albemarle Corporation (ALB). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| EMN | ALB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.25 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 1.23 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.06 | 1.61 | -1.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.12 | 4.40 | -4.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMN vs. ALB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMN drawdown since its inception was -76.11%, smaller than the maximum ALB drawdown of -83.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMN and ALB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMN | ALB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -76.11% | -83.90% | +7.79% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.86% | -47.38% | +28.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -48.40% | -74.05% | +25.65% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -49.35% | -83.90% | +34.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -62.74% | -83.90% | +21.16% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -34.83% | -61.95% | +27.12% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.20% | -20.83% | +1.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.14% | 17.27% | -6.13% |
Volatility
EMN vs. ALB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Eastman Chemical Company (EMN) is 7.63%, while Albemarle Corporation (ALB) has a volatility of 8.79%. This indicates that EMN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ALB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMN | ALB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.63% | 8.79% | -1.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.75% | 40.94% | -17.19% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 38.78% | 59.34% | -20.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.19% | 54.68% | -22.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.78% | 48.44% | -16.66% |
Dividends
EMN vs. ALB - Dividend Comparison
EMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.79%, more than ALB's 1.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ALB Albemarle Corporation | 1.38% | 1.15% | 1.87% | 1.11% | 0.73% | 0.67% | 1.04% | 2.01% | 1.74% | 1.00% | 1.42% | 2.07% |
EMN Eastman Chemical Company | 4.79% | 5.22% | 3.57% | 3.54% | 3.77% | 2.34% | 2.66% | 3.18% | 3.15% | 2.26% | 2.51% | 2.46% |
Financials
EMN vs. ALB - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Eastman Chemical Company and Albemarle Corporation. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
EMN vs. ALB - Profitability Comparison
EMN - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Eastman Chemical Company reported a gross profit of 560.00M and revenue of 2.51B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 22.3%.
ALB - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Albemarle Corporation reported a gross profit of 500.97M and revenue of 1.43B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 35.1%.
EMN - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Eastman Chemical Company reported an operating income of 310.00M and revenue of 2.51B, resulting in an operating margin of 12.3%.
ALB - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Albemarle Corporation reported an operating income of 233.51M and revenue of 1.43B, resulting in an operating margin of 16.3%.
EMN - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Eastman Chemical Company reported a net income of 183.00M and revenue of 2.51B, resulting in a net margin of 7.3%.
ALB - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Albemarle Corporation reported a net income of 277.40M and revenue of 1.43B, resulting in a net margin of 19.4%.
Frequently Asked Questions
EMN and ALB have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ALB has higher volatility (8.79%) compared to EMN (7.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMN dropped -76.11% vs ALB's -83.90%.
ALB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.28 vs 0.03), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for EMN and ALB
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer