Ferroglobe (GSM) Competitors

Ferroglobe has higher revenue and earnings than TMC the metals. Ferroglobe is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than TMC the metals, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Ferroglobe currently has a consensus target price of $6.00, suggesting a potential upside of 47.42%. TMC the metals has a consensus target price of $10.44, suggesting a potential upside of 165.59%. Given TMC the metals' stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts clearly believe TMC the metals is more favorable than Ferroglobe.

In the previous week, TMC the metals had 3 more articles in the media than Ferroglobe. MarketBeat recorded 7 mentions for TMC the metals and 4 mentions for Ferroglobe. Ferroglobe's average media sentiment score of 0.63 beat TMC the metals' score of 0.50 indicating that Ferroglobe is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Ferroglobe has a beta of 1, indicating that its stock price has a similar volatility profile to the broader market.Comparatively, TMC the metals has a beta of 2.1, indicating that its stock price is 110% more volatile than the broader market.

89.6% of Ferroglobe shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 4.4% of TMC the metals shares are owned by institutional investors. 13.1% of Ferroglobe shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 28.5% of TMC the metals shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, hedge funds and large money managers believe a stock will outperform the market over the long term.

TMC the metals has a net margin of 0.00% compared to Ferroglobe's net margin of -2.96%. TMC the metals' return on equity of 0.00% beat Ferroglobe's return on equity.

Sigma Lithium has lower revenue, but higher earnings than Ferroglobe. Sigma Lithium is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Ferroglobe, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Ferroglobe currently has a consensus target price of $6.00, suggesting a potential upside of 47.42%. Sigma Lithium has a consensus target price of $17.38, suggesting a potential upside of 81.37%. Given Sigma Lithium's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, analysts plainly believe Sigma Lithium is more favorable than Ferroglobe.

In the previous week, Sigma Lithium had 1 more articles in the media than Ferroglobe. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Sigma Lithium and 4 mentions for Ferroglobe. Ferroglobe's average media sentiment score of 0.63 beat Sigma Lithium's score of 0.55 indicating that Ferroglobe is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Ferroglobe has a beta of 1, meaning that its share price has a similar volatility profile to the broader market.Comparatively, Sigma Lithium has a beta of 0.64, meaning that its share price is 36% less volatile than the broader market.

Ferroglobe has a net margin of -2.96% compared to Sigma Lithium's net margin of -19.36%. Ferroglobe's return on equity of -3.73% beat Sigma Lithium's return on equity.

89.6% of Ferroglobe shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 64.9% of Sigma Lithium shares are held by institutional investors. 13.1% of Ferroglobe shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 48.6% of Sigma Lithium shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Lithium Americas has lower revenue, but higher earnings than Ferroglobe. Ferroglobe is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Lithium Americas, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

In the previous week, Lithium Americas had 1 more articles in the media than Ferroglobe. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Lithium Americas and 4 mentions for Ferroglobe. Ferroglobe's average media sentiment score of 0.63 beat Lithium Americas' score of 0.48 indicating that Ferroglobe is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Ferroglobe has a beta of 1, meaning that its stock price has a similar volatility profile to the broader market.Comparatively, Lithium Americas has a beta of 2.59, meaning that its stock price is 159% more volatile than the broader market.

Ferroglobe currently has a consensus target price of $6.00, suggesting a potential upside of 47.42%. Lithium Americas has a consensus target price of $5.33, suggesting a potential upside of 93.59%. Given Lithium Americas' stronger consensus rating and higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Lithium Americas is more favorable than Ferroglobe.

89.6% of Ferroglobe shares are owned by institutional investors. 13.1% of Ferroglobe shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 0.7% of Lithium Americas shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, endowments and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Lithium Americas has a net margin of 0.00% compared to Ferroglobe's net margin of -2.96%. Ferroglobe's return on equity of -3.73% beat Lithium Americas' return on equity.

Compass Minerals International has a net margin of 1.42% compared to Ferroglobe's net margin of -2.96%. Compass Minerals International's return on equity of 12.75% beat Ferroglobe's return on equity.

Ferroglobe has a beta of 1, indicating that its stock price has a similar volatility profile to the broader market.Comparatively, Compass Minerals International has a beta of 1.22, indicating that its stock price is 22% more volatile than the broader market.

89.6% of Ferroglobe shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 99.8% of Compass Minerals International shares are held by institutional investors. 13.1% of Ferroglobe shares are held by insiders. Comparatively, 1.0% of Compass Minerals International shares are held by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

Compass Minerals International has lower revenue, but higher earnings than Ferroglobe. Ferroglobe is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Compass Minerals International, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Ferroglobe currently has a consensus price target of $6.00, suggesting a potential upside of 47.42%. Compass Minerals International has a consensus price target of $27.00, suggesting a potential upside of 19.32%. Given Ferroglobe's stronger consensus rating and higher possible upside, equities analysts plainly believe Ferroglobe is more favorable than Compass Minerals International.

In the previous week, Ferroglobe had 1 more articles in the media than Compass Minerals International. MarketBeat recorded 4 mentions for Ferroglobe and 3 mentions for Compass Minerals International. Ferroglobe's average media sentiment score of 0.63 beat Compass Minerals International's score of 0.60 indicating that Ferroglobe is being referred to more favorably in the media.