Ingevity's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Ingevity (NGVT) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Ingevity vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 1,091M vs 970,141M combined for tracked competitors (0.1% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+15.2% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+24.8%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Ingevity generated -14.0% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs 41.1% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 11.2% net margin compares with 14.3% for the peer group.
- Scale: Ingevity ranks #26 of 83 companies by market capitalization in the Chemical Manufacturing industry, holding 0.5% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Ingevity accounted for 0.1% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 0.2% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.73M compares with $2.03M for the peer group (0.4x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
NGVT Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Ingevity reported revenue contraction of 13.97 % year on year in Q2 2026, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 41.06 %.
With a net margin of 11.24 %, Ingevity reported lower profitability than its competitors (14.30 %).
Ingevity generated 0.10 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 0.17 % a year earlier.
Ingevity vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Ingevity and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (3) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (9) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Ingevity's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Chemical Manufacturing industry grew revenue 2.6% year over year, combined, vs -14.0% for Ingevity. Ingevity's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.40% to 0.34%, a loss of 0.06 percentage points.
Ingevity's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | Yes | No | No | No |
| Competitors combined (35) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (7) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
NGVT Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
NGVT Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
NGVT Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dupont De Nemours Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Calumet Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Valero Energy Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Flotek Industries Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Ecopetrol S a | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Ingevity's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Ingevity's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Publicly Traded Peers of Ingevity Corporation
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | 2,566.19 | 1,090.60 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 678,400.22 | 368,757.00 |
| Chevron Corp | 407,361.69 | 215,261.00 |
| Conocophillips | 153,044.70 | 63,345.00 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 114,533.58 | 139,397.00 |
| 3m Company | 88,536.35 | 25,180.00 |
| SUBTOTAL | 1,728,262.61 | 1,046,777.66 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Ingevity Corporation.
Sources: Ingevity Corporation's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Ingevity Corporation versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Ingevity's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Eastman Chemical Co. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Kraton Corp. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Norit | Named by the company | 85% |
| Repsol S.A. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Cabot Corp. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Forchem | Named by the company | 85% |
| Lawter, Inc. | Named by the company | 85% |
| PMC | Named by the company | 85% |
| Vantage | Named by the company | 85% |
| Arkema S.A. | Named by the company | 85% |
| ExxonMobil Corp. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Kuraray Co., Ltd. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Nouryon Chemicals B.V. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Respol S.A. | Named by the company | 85% |
| First Source Technologies, Inc. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Cargill | Named by the company | 85% |
| Kao Specialties Americas LLC | Named by the company | 85% |
| Mobile Rosin Oil Company, Inc. | Named by the company | 85% |
| PPG Industries Traffic Solutions | Named by the company | 85% |
| Zydex Group | Named by the company | 85% |
| Borregaard ASA | Named by the company | 85% |
| Firmenich SA | Named by the company | 85% |
| Lamberti S.p.A. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Osaka Gas Chemicals Co., Ltd. | Named by the company | 85% |
| Sherwin-Williams Company | Named by the company | 85% |
| Global Industrial Company | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Ingevity's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Ingevity's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Corporate and Unallocated 0.20 % |
| Chevron Corp | Reportable Segment, Aggregation before Other Operating 99.73 % |
| Valero Energy Corp | Refining 95.14 % |
| 3m Company | Safety and Industrial 47.55 % |
| Illinois Tool Works Inc | Automotive OEM 20.42 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Sign in to see all peers for Ingevity Corporation.
Ingevity's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | 2,566 | 727,067 | 36,000 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 678,400 | 6,357,879 | 575,414 |
| Chevron Corp | 407,362 | 5,001,533 | 487,116 |
| Conocophillips | 153,045 | 6,398,485 | 936,263 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 114,534 | 14,208,236 | 777,699 |
| 3m Company | 88,536 | 416,198 | 49,785 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 1,725,696 | 2,034,886 | 168,458 |
Sign in to see all peers for Ingevity Corporation.
Ingevity's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| 3m Company | Americas 54.09 % |
| Dupont De Nemours Inc | United States 44.47 % |
| Rpm International Inc | US 68.55 % |
| Quaker Chemical Corporation | Americas 44.48 % |
| Fuller H B Co | Americas 50.79 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Sign in to see all peers for Ingevity Corporation.
Ingevity's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 79 companies in Ingevity's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Ingevity ranks #26 of 79 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.49 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 2,024, indicating a moderately concentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Linde Plc | 217,945 | 41.32 % |
| 2 | Air Products And Chemicals Inc | 62,697 | 11.89 % |
| 3 | Corteva Inc | 52,519 | 9.96 % |
| 4 | Ppg Industries Inc | 23,742 | 4.50 % |
| 5 | International Flavors and Fragrances Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Lyondellbasell Industries N v | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Rpm International Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Element Solutions Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Westlake Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Newmarket Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 26 | Ingevity Corporation | 2,571 | 0.49 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Ingevity's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
Ingevity's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | Ashland Inc | 3,151 | 43.06 % |
| 22 | Quaker Chemical Corporation | 2,765 | 24.38 % |
| 23 | Fuller H B Co | 2,711 | -13.59 % |
| 24 | Wd 40 Company | 2,698 | 0.38 % |
| 25 | Hawkins Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 26 | Ingevity Corporation | 2,571 | 34.04 % |
| 27 | Innospec Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 28 | The Chemours Company | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 29 | Minerals Technologies Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 30 | Olin Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 31 | Huntsman Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Ingevity's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Ingevity's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Chemical Manufacturing industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (96 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 42.69 % | 30.74 % (avg) | +11.9 pp |
| Operating Margin | - | industry median | - |
| EBITDA Margin | 22.13 % | 3.22 % (avg) | +18.9 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 5.14 % | 7.98 % (avg) | -2.8 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Ingevity's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Chemical Manufacturing industry average (96 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 47.8x | 27.8x | +20.0x |
| EV / EBITDA | 16.2x | 16.1x | +0.1x |
| P/B | 39.9x | 3.9x | +36.0x |
| Return on Equity | 85.17 % | industry aggregate | 82.37 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | - | 0.90 % (avg) | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Ingevity's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 16.58 % | 14.05 % | -5.94 % | 14.42 % | 19.89 % | 1.41 % | -16.87 % | -16.98 % |
| Operating Margin | 22.24 % | 21.06 % | 23.99 % | 22.03 % | 20.14 % | 14.94 % | -26.54 % | 5.27 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 17.28 % | 11.47 % | 10.65 % | 10.39 % | 11.59 % | 7.83 % | -16.13 % | 3.64 % |
| P/E | 22.6x | 19.8x | 19.3x | 31.3x | 14.9x | - | - | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Ingevity's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Ingevity's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
Ingevity falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.01x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 3.4% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution. A caveat worth reading alongside this chart: Linde Plc alone holds 41% of this industry's market cap. In an industry this dominated by one leader, the framework will place nearly every OTHER company in "Dog" or "Question Mark" purely because relative share is measured against that leader, regardless of how strong those other companies actually are on their own fundamentals. Check the Profitability, Valuation and Financial Strength sections above before treating this quadrant label as a verdict.
Ingevity's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | Moderate | Industry HHI of 2,024 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 5.14 % vs industry average 7.98 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Ingevity's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Ingevity's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Ingevity's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Ingevity falls in the Low attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Harvest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Ingevity's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Return on equity 82.4 points above the industry aggregate.
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+15.2% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Outperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
Weaknesses
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.01x).
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
- Industry dominated by Linde Plc, holding 41.32 % of industry market cap.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Ingevity's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | 0.35 | 1.40 | 23.95 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 0.13 | 1.11 | 0.17 |
| Chevron Corp | 0.01 | 1.16 | 0.21 |
| Conocophillips | 0.49 | 1.36 | 0.45 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 0.35 | 1.61 | 0.32 |
| 3m Company | - | 1.57 | 3.20 |
Sign in to see all peers for Ingevity Corporation.
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Ingevity's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | Q2 2026 | -14.0 % | - |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Q2 2026 | +42.3 % | +97.5 % |
| Chevron Corp | Q2 2026 | +56.3 % | +385.6 % |
| Conocophillips | Q2 2026 | +36.8 % | +98.8 % |
| Valero Energy Corp | Q2 2026 | +48.8 % | +514.3 % |
| 3m Company | Q2 2026 | +2.5 % | +29.4 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +32.2 % | +143.9 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Ingevity Corporation.
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Ingevity's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | Q2 2026 | -14.0 % | -15.6 % |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Q2 2026 | - | +3.9 % |
| Chevron Corp | Q2 2026 | +36.3 % | +22.3 % |
| Conocophillips | Q2 2026 | +32.0 % | - |
| Valero Energy Corp | Q2 2026 | +36.2 % | - |
| 3m Company | Q2 2026 | +4.7 % | +7.2 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Ingevity Corporation.
Ingevity's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | 3.24% | 3.32% | 85.17% |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 7.29% | 7.92% | 12.57% |
| Chevron Corp | 6.40% | 6.49% | 10.85% |
| Conocophillips | 7.55% | 8.36% | 14.30% |
| Valero Energy Corp | 12.54% | 16.22% | 28.12% |
| 3m Company | 8.27% | 11.16% | 76.55% |
Sign in to see all peers for Ingevity Corporation.
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Ingevity's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Ingevity Corporation | 48.49 | 2.35 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 20.97 | 1.84 |
| Chevron Corp | 19.59 | 1.89 |
| Conocophillips | 16.72 | 2.42 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 16.21 | 0.82 |
| 3m Company | 30.10 | 3.52 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 19.95 | 1.65 |
Sign in to see all peers for Ingevity Corporation.
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.