Minerals Technologies (MTX) Competitors

Minerals Technologies presently has a consensus target price of $90.00, suggesting a potential upside of 44.72%. Avient has a consensus target price of $48.75, suggesting a potential upside of 5.34%. Given Minerals Technologies' higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe Minerals Technologies is more favorable than Avient.

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

97.3% of Minerals Technologies shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 95.5% of Avient shares are owned by institutional investors. 3.7% of Minerals Technologies shares are owned by insiders. Comparatively, 0.9% of Avient shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, endowments and hedge funds believe a stock is poised for long-term growth.

Minerals Technologies pays an annual dividend of $0.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 0.8%. Avient pays an annual dividend of $1.13 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.4%. Minerals Technologies pays out -24.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Avient pays out 57.9% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Minerals Technologies has raised its dividend for 2 consecutive years and Avient has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

Avient has a net margin of 5.27% compared to Minerals Technologies' net margin of -3.12%. Avient's return on equity of 12.17% beat Minerals Technologies' return on equity.

Minerals Technologies has a beta of 1.15, suggesting that its share price is 15% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Avient has a beta of 1.23, suggesting that its share price is 23% more volatile than the broader market.

In the previous week, Avient had 14 more articles in the media than Minerals Technologies. MarketBeat recorded 16 mentions for Avient and 2 mentions for Minerals Technologies. Minerals Technologies' average media sentiment score of 0.89 beat Avient's score of 0.68 indicating that Minerals Technologies is being referred to more favorably in the media.

In the previous week, Brunswick had 5 more articles in the media than Minerals Technologies. MarketBeat recorded 7 mentions for Brunswick and 2 mentions for Minerals Technologies. Minerals Technologies' average media sentiment score of 0.89 beat Brunswick's score of 0.80 indicating that Minerals Technologies is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Minerals Technologies presently has a consensus target price of $90.00, indicating a potential upside of 44.72%. Brunswick has a consensus target price of $83.75, indicating a potential upside of 6.85%. Given Minerals Technologies' higher possible upside, analysts clearly believe Minerals Technologies is more favorable than Brunswick.

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

Minerals Technologies pays an annual dividend of $0.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 0.8%. Brunswick pays an annual dividend of $1.76 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.2%. Minerals Technologies pays out -24.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Brunswick pays out 54.5% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Minerals Technologies has raised its dividend for 2 consecutive years and Brunswick has raised its dividend for 13 consecutive years. Brunswick is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

97.3% of Minerals Technologies shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 99.3% of Brunswick shares are owned by institutional investors. 3.7% of Minerals Technologies shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 1.0% of Brunswick shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, hedge funds and large money managers believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Brunswick has a net margin of 3.69% compared to Minerals Technologies' net margin of -3.12%. Brunswick's return on equity of 17.51% beat Minerals Technologies' return on equity.

Minerals Technologies has a beta of 1.15, suggesting that its stock price is 15% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Brunswick has a beta of 1.4, suggesting that its stock price is 40% more volatile than the broader market.

Minerals Technologies pays an annual dividend of $0.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 0.8%. Cabot pays an annual dividend of $1.89 per share and has a dividend yield of 2.6%. Minerals Technologies pays out -24.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Cabot pays out 47.1% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Minerals Technologies has increased its dividend for 2 consecutive years and Cabot has increased its dividend for 14 consecutive years. Cabot is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

In the previous week, Cabot had 9 more articles in the media than Minerals Technologies. MarketBeat recorded 11 mentions for Cabot and 2 mentions for Minerals Technologies. Minerals Technologies' average media sentiment score of 0.89 beat Cabot's score of -0.20 indicating that Minerals Technologies is being referred to more favorably in the media.

Minerals Technologies presently has a consensus target price of $90.00, suggesting a potential upside of 44.72%. Cabot has a consensus target price of $83.60, suggesting a potential upside of 15.73%. Given Minerals Technologies' higher possible upside, equities analysts clearly believe Minerals Technologies is more favorable than Cabot.

97.3% of Minerals Technologies shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 93.2% of Cabot shares are owned by institutional investors. 3.7% of Minerals Technologies shares are owned by company insiders. Comparatively, 3.1% of Cabot shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, endowments and large money managers believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

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

Minerals Technologies has a beta of 1.15, suggesting that its share price is 15% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Cabot has a beta of 0.83, suggesting that its share price is 17% less volatile than the broader market.

Cabot has a net margin of 5.69% compared to Minerals Technologies' net margin of -3.12%. Cabot's return on equity of 19.64% beat Minerals Technologies' return on equity.

Eastman Chemical pays an annual dividend of $3.36 per share and has a dividend yield of 5.1%. Minerals Technologies pays an annual dividend of $0.52 per share and has a dividend yield of 0.8%. Eastman Chemical pays out 59.7% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Minerals Technologies pays out -24.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years. Eastman Chemical has raised its dividend for 15 consecutive years and Minerals Technologies has raised its dividend for 2 consecutive years. Eastman Chemical is clearly the better dividend stock, given its higher yield and longer track record of dividend growth.

Eastman Chemical has a net margin of 7.15% compared to Minerals Technologies' net margin of -3.12%. Minerals Technologies' return on equity of 10.73% beat Eastman Chemical's return on equity.

Eastman Chemical currently has a consensus target price of $74.79, indicating a potential upside of 12.42%. Minerals Technologies has a consensus target price of $90.00, indicating a potential upside of 44.72%. Given Minerals Technologies' higher probable upside, analysts clearly believe Minerals Technologies is more favorable than Eastman Chemical.

83.7% of Eastman Chemical shares are held by institutional investors. Comparatively, 97.3% of Minerals Technologies shares are held by institutional investors. 2.6% of Eastman Chemical shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 3.7% of Minerals Technologies shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth.

In the previous week, Eastman Chemical had 3 more articles in the media than Minerals Technologies. MarketBeat recorded 5 mentions for Eastman Chemical and 2 mentions for Minerals Technologies. Minerals Technologies' average media sentiment score of 0.89 beat Eastman Chemical's score of 0.31 indicating that Minerals Technologies is being referred to more favorably in the news media.

Eastman Chemical has higher revenue and earnings than Minerals Technologies. Minerals Technologies is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Eastman Chemical, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Eastman Chemical has a beta of 1.07, suggesting that its share price is 7% more volatile than the broader market. Comparatively, Minerals Technologies has a beta of 1.15, suggesting that its share price is 15% more volatile than the broader market.