SQM vs. ASML

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. (SQM) and ASML Holding N.V. (ASML).

Performance

SQM vs. ASML - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. (SQM) and ASML Holding N.V. (ASML). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

SQM vs. ASML - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SQM Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A.	17.65%	89.55%	-39.35%	-18.47%	71.62%	6.82%	89.19%	-27.30%	-32.71%	115.00%
ASML ASML Holding N.V.	23.62%	56.51%	-7.70%	39.91%	-30.49%	64.13%	66.06%	93.56%	-9.80%	56.23%

Fundamentals

Market Cap SQM : $23.12B ASML : $513.67B
EPS SQM : $2.06 ASML : $23.77
PE Ratio SQM : 39.20 ASML : 55.57
PEG Ratio SQM : 0.23 ASML : 3.99
PS Ratio SQM : 5.04 ASML : 16.35
PB Ratio SQM : 4.06 ASML : 26.20
Total Revenue (TTM) SQM : $4.59B ASML : $31.38B
Gross Profit (TTM) SQM : $1.36B ASML : $16.58B
EBITDA (TTM) SQM : $1.27B ASML : $11.94B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SQM achieves a 17.65% return, which is significantly lower than ASML's 23.62% return. Over the past 10 years, SQM has underperformed ASML with an annualized return of 19.45%, while ASML has yielded a comparatively higher 30.71% annualized return.

SQM

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 6.08%
• YTD: 17.65%
• 6M: 88.65%
• 1Y: 104.09%
• 3Y*: 2.79%
• 5Y*: 12.83%
• 10Y*: 19.45%

ASML

• 1D: 5.33%
• 1M: -8.94%
• YTD: 23.62%
• 6M: 36.86%
• 1Y: 101.57%
• 3Y*: 26.02%
• 5Y*: 16.89%
• 10Y*: 30.71%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

SQM vs. ASML — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

SQM

SQM Risk / Return Rank: 89
SQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
SQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
SQM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
SQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
SQM Martin Ratio Rank: 89

ASML

ASML Risk / Return Rank: 93
ASML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
ASML Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
ASML Omega Ratio Rank: 90
ASML Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
ASML Martin Ratio Rank: 95

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

SQM vs. ASML - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. (SQM) and ASML Holding N.V. (ASML). 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.

	SQM	ASML	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	2.45	-0.41
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.61	3.04	-0.43
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.39	-0.07
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.06	5.49	-1.43
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.94	15.40	-5.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SQM vs. ASML - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SQM Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the ASML Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SQM and ASML, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SQM	ASML	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.04	2.45	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.26	0.41	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.42	0.81	-0.39
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.42	0.54	-0.11

Correlation

The correlation between SQM and ASML is 0.31, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

SQM vs. ASML - Dividend Comparison

SQM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, less than ASML's 0.71% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SQM Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A.	0.15%	0.18%	0.59%	8.34%	9.66%	3.92%	1.64%	4.55%	5.37%	2.73%	4.77%	2.00%
ASML ASML Holding N.V.	0.71%	0.97%	0.97%	0.86%	1.27%	0.50%	0.50%	1.40%	0.94%	0.64%	0.92%	0.73%

Drawdowns

SQM vs. ASML - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SQM drawdown since its inception was -78.34%, smaller than the maximum ASML drawdown of -90.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SQM and ASML.

Drawdown Indicators

	SQM	ASML	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.34%	-90.00%	+11.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.02%	-17.85%	-7.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.76%	-56.84%	-12.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-72.98%	-56.84%	-16.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.36%	-13.47%	-4.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.43%	-28.28%	-2.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.22%	6.37%	+3.85%

Volatility

SQM vs. ASML - Volatility Comparison

Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. (SQM) has a higher volatility of 17.99% compared to ASML Holding N.V. (ASML) at 14.88%. This indicates that SQM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASML based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SQM	ASML	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.99%	14.88%	+3.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.57%	29.34%	+7.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.41%	41.81%	+9.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	49.55%	41.55%	+8.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	45.99%	38.06%	+7.93%

Financials

SQM vs. ASML - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. and ASML Holding N.V. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

SQM - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. reported a gross profit of 455.49M and revenue of 1.34B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 34.1%.

ASML - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, ASML Holding N.V. reported a gross profit of 4.47B and revenue of 8.43B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 53.1%.

SQM - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. reported an operating income of 398.13M and revenue of 1.34B, resulting in an operating margin of 29.8%.

ASML - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, ASML Holding N.V. reported an operating income of 2.51B and revenue of 8.43B, resulting in an operating margin of 29.8%.

SQM - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. reported a net income of 185.41M and revenue of 1.34B, resulting in a net margin of 13.9%.

ASML - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, ASML Holding N.V. reported a net income of 2.07B and revenue of 8.43B, resulting in a net margin of 24.6%.