Gevo Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Gevo Inc (GEVO) 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: Gevo Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 178M vs 183,006M combined for tracked competitors (0.1% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+4.8% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+12.4%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Gevo Inc generated 7.1% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs 5.2% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its -379.1% net margin compares with 5.2% for the peer group.
- Scale: Gevo Inc ranks #46 of 83 companies by market capitalization in the Chemical Manufacturing industry, holding 0.1% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Gevo Inc accounted for 0.1% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 0.1% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $1.18M compares with $0.90M for the peer group (1.3x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
GEVO Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Gevo Inc reported revenue growth of 7.11 % year on year in Q2 2026, above its competitors' combined revenue growth of 5.16 %.
With a net margin of -379.05 %, Gevo Inc reported lower profitability than its competitors (5.20 %).
Gevo Inc generated 0.09 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 0.09 % a year earlier.
Gevo Inc 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 Gevo Inc and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (6) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (4) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Gevo Inc's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Chemical Manufacturing industry grew revenue 2.6% year over year, combined, vs 7.1% for Gevo Inc. Gevo Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.05% to 0.05%, a gain of 0.00 percentage points.
Gevo Inc'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | No | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (38) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | - | - | - | |
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 37.50 % (3 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 12.50 % (1 of 8) |
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.
GEVO Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
GEVO Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
GEVO Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
GEVO Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability 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 | Alto Ingredients Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Flotek Industries Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Ecopetrol S a | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Green Plains Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Gevo Inc's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Gevo Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Our isobutanol is targeted for use in the following markets: direct use as a solvent and gasoline blendstock, use in the chemicals industry for producing rubber, plastics, fibers, polyester and other polymers and use in the production of hydrocarbon fuels. We face competitors in each market, some of which are limited to individual markets, and some of which will compete with us across all of our target markets. Many of our competitors have greater financial resources than we do.
Renewable isobutanol. We are a leader in the development of renewable isobutanol
via fermentation of renewable plant biomass. While the competitive landscape
in renewable isobutanol production is limited at this time, we are aware of
other companies that are seeking to develop isobutanol production capabilities,
including Butamax with whom we have entered into the License Agreement.
Solvent markets. We also face competition from companies that are focused on
the development of n-butanol, a related compound to isobutanol. These companies
include Cathay Industrial Biotech Ltd., METabolic EXplorer S.A., Eastman Chemicals
Company, and Green Biologics Ltd. We understand that these companies produce
n-butanol from an acetone-butanol-ethanol (“ABE”) fermentation process
primarily for the small chemicals markets. ABE fermentation using a Clostridia
biocatalyst has been used in industrial settings since 1919. As discussed in
several academic papers analyzing the ABE process, such fermentation is handicapped
in competitiveness by high energy costs due to low concentrations of butanol
produced and significant volumes of water processed. It requires high capital
and operating costs to support industrial scale production due to the low rates
of the Clostridia fermentation, and results in a lower butanol yield because
it produces ethanol and acetone as by-products. We believe our proprietary process
has many significant advantages over the ABE process because of its limited
requirements for new capital expenditures, its production output of only isobutanol
as a primary product and its limited water usage in production. We believe these
advantages will produce a lower cost isobutanol compared to n-butanol produced
by ABE fermentation. N-butanol’s lower octane rating compared to isobutanol
gives it a lower value in the gasoline blendstock market, but n-butanol can
compete directly in many solvent markets where n-butanol and isobutanol have
similar performance characteristics.
Gasoline blendstocks. In the gasoline blendstock market isobutanol competes
with non-renewable alkylate and renewable ethanol. We estimate the total potential
global market for isobutanol as a gasoline blendstock to be approximately 40
BGPY. Alkylate is a premium value gasoline blendstock typically derived from
petroleum. However, petroleum feeds for alkylate manufacture are pressured by
continued increases in the use of natural gas to generate olefins for the production
of alkylate, due to the low relative cost of natural gas compared to petroleum.
Isobutanol has fuel properties similar to alkylate and, as such, we expect that
isobutanol could be used as a substitute for some alkylate in fuel applications.
Ethanol is renewable and has a high octane rating, and although it has a high
RVP, ethanol receives a one pound RVP waiver in a large portion of the U.S.
gasoline market. Renewability is important in the U.S. because the Renewable
Fuels Standard program mandates that a minimum volume of renewable blendstocks
be used in gasoline each year. A high octane rating is important for engine
performance and is a valuable characteristic because many inexpensive gasoline
blendstocks have lower octane ratings. Low RVP is important because the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) sets maximum permissible
RVP levels for gasoline. In markets where low RVP is important, isobutanol can
enable refiners to meet fuel specifications at lower cost. Ethanol’s vapor
pressure waiver is valuable because it offsets much of the negative value of
ethanol’s high RVP. We believe that our isobutanol will be valued for
its combination of low RVP, low water solubility, relatively high octane and
renewability.
Many production and technology supply companies are working to develop ethanol
production from cellulosic feedstocks, including Shell Oil Company, DuPont-Danisco
Cellulosic Ethanol LLC, POET, LLC, ICM, Mascoma Corporation, Inbicon A/S, INEOS
New Planet BioEnergy LLC, Archer Daniels Midland Company, BlueFire Renewables,
Inc., ZeaChem Inc., Iogen Corporation, Qteros, Inc., and many smaller startup
companies. Successful commercialization by some or all of these companies will
increase the supply of renewable gasoline blendstocks worldwide, potentially
reducing the market size or margins available to isobutanol.
Plastics, fibers, polyester, rubber and other polymers. Isobutanol can be dehydrated
to produce butenes, hydrocarbon intermediates currently used in the production
of plastics, fibers, polyester, rubber and other polymers. The straightforward
conversion of our isobutanol into butenes is a fundamentally important process
that enables isobutanol to be used as a building block chemical in multiple
markets. These markets include butyl rubber, lubricants and additives derived
from butenes such as isobutylene, poly methyl methacrylate from isobutanol,
propylene for polypropylene from isobutylene, polyesters made via PX from isobutylene
and polystyrene made via styrene.
In these markets, we compete with the renewable isobutanol companies and renewable
n-butanol producers described previously, and face similar competitive challenges.
Our competitive position versus petroleum-derived plastics, fibers, rubber and
other polymers varies, but we believe that the high volatility of petroleum
prices, often tight supply markets for petroleum-based petrochemical feedstocks
and the desire of many consumers for goods made from more renewable sources
will enable us to compete effectively. However, petrochemical companies may
develop alternative pathways to produce petrochemical-based hydrocarbon products
that may be less expensive than our isobutanol or more readily available or
developed in conjunction with major petrochemical, refiner or end user companies.
These products may have economic or other advantages over the plastics, fibers,
polyester, rubber and other polymers developed from our isobutanol. Further,
some of these companies have access to significantly more resources than we
do to develop products.
Additionally, Global Bioenergies, S.A. is pursuing the direct production of
isobutylene from renewable carbohydrates. Through analysis of the fermentation
pathway, we believe that the direct production of butenes such as isobutylene
via fermentation will have higher capital and operating costs than production
of butenes derived from our isobutanol.
Hydrocarbon fuels. Beyond direct use as a fuel additive, isobutanol can be converted
into many hydrocarbon fuels and specialty blendstocks, offering substantial
potential for additional demand in the fuels markets. We will compete with the
incumbent petroleum-based fuels industry, as well as biofuels companies. The
incumbent petroleum-based fuels industry makes the vast majority of the world’s
gasoline, jet and diesel fuels and blendstocks. The petroleum-based fuels industry
is mature, and includes a substantial base of infrastructure for the production
and distribution of petroleum-derived products. However, the industry faces
challenges from its dependence on petroleum. High and volatile oil prices will
provide an opportunity for renewable producers relying on biobased feedstocks
like corn, which in recent years have had lower price volatility than oil, to
compete.
Biofuels companies will provide substantial competition in the gasoline market.
These biofuels competitors are numerous and include both large established companies
and numerous startups. Government tax incentives for renewable fuel producers
and regulations such as the RFS2 help provide opportunities for renewable fuels
producers to compete. In particular, in the gasoline and gasoline blendstock
markets, Virent Energy Systems, Inc. (“Virent”) offers a competitive
process for making gasoline and gasoline blendstocks. However, we have the advantage
of being able to target conversion of isobutanol into specific high-value molecules
such as isooctane, which can be used to make gasoline blendstocks with a higher
value than whole gasoline, which we do not believe Virent’s process can
match. In the jet fuel market, we may face competition from companies such as
Synthetic Genomics, Inc., Sapphire Energy, Inc. and Exxon-Mobil Corporation,
which are pursuing production of jet fuel from algae-based technology. Renewable
Energy Group, Inc. and others are also targeting production of jet fuels from
vegetable oils and animal fats. Red Rock Biofuels LLC, Fulcrum BioEnergy, Inc.
and others are planning to produce jet fuel from renewable biomass. In the diesel
fuels market, competitors such as Amyris Biotechnologies, Inc. (“Amyris”)
provide alternative hydrocarbon diesel fuel. We believe our technology provides
a higher yield on feedstock than the isoprenoid fermentation pathway developed
by Amyris, which we believe will yield a production cost advantage.
Ethanol. We compete with numerous ethanol producers located throughout the U.S.,
many of which have much greater resources than we do, including Archer-Daniels-Midland
Company, Green Plains, Inc., POET, LLC and Valero Energy Corporation. Competition
for corn supply from other ethanol plants and other corn consumers will likely
exist in all areas and regions in which our current and future plants will operate.
We also face competition from foreign producers of ethanol and such competition
may increase significantly in the future. Large international companies have
developed, or are developing, increased foreign ethanol production capacities.
Brazil is the world’s second largest ethanol producing country. Brazil’s
ethanol production is sugarcane-based, as opposed to corn-based, and has historically
been less expensive to produce.
Publicly Traded Peers of Gevo inc
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | 317.65 | 177.51 |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 38,984.30 | 82,099.00 |
| Ecopetrol S a | 34,335.20 | 30,513.17 |
| Ppg Industries Inc | 24,013.04 | 16,121.00 |
| Dow Inc | 20,114.27 | 39,331.00 |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | 18,823.42 | 31,192.00 |
| SUBTOTAL | 250,131.83 | 282,288.24 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Gevo inc .
Sources: Gevo inc'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 Gevo inc versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Gevo Inc's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Exozymes Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Virent Energy Systems | Named by the company | 85% |
| Mdb Capital Holdings Llc | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Gevo Inc'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.
Gevo Inc'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 |
|---|---|
| Gevo inc | Gevo North Dakota Segment 88.55 % |
| Archer daniels midland Co | Ag Services and Oilseeds 76.86 % |
| Ppg Industries Inc | Industrial Coatings 39.69 % |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | Olefins and Polyolefins - Americas 38.37 % |
| Dupont De Nemours Inc | Diversified Industrials 52.94 % |
| Albemarle Corporation | Energy Storage 62.37 % |
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).
Gevo Inc'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | 318 | 1,175,543 | -1,398,656 |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 38,984 | 1,978,480 | 42,872 |
| Ecopetrol S a | 34,335 | 1,271,382 | 153,423 |
| Ppg Industries Inc | 24,013 | 370,598 | 36,759 |
| Dow Inc | 20,114 | 1,136,734 | -75,116 |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | 18,823 | 1,644,280 | -18,239 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 249,814 | 904,804 | 13,868 |
Gevo Inc'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 |
|---|---|
| Ppg Industries Inc | North America 35.64 % |
| Dupont De Nemours Inc | United States 44.47 % |
| Rpm International Inc | US 68.55 % |
| Newmarket Corporation | United States 38.43 % |
| Axalta Coating Systems Ltd | EMEA 35.94 % |
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.
Gevo Inc's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 79 companies in Gevo Inc's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Gevo Inc ranks #46 of 79 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.06 % 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% |
| 46 | Gevo inc | 335 | 0.06 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Gevo Inc'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.
Gevo Inc'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 41 | Tronox Holdings Plc | 631 | 1.28 % |
| 42 | Luxfer Holdings Plc | 470 | 25.09 % |
| 43 | Valhi inc | 460 | 1.57 % |
| 44 | Standard Lithium Ltd | 370 | -52.51 % |
| 45 | Cardinal Ethanol Llc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 46 | Gevo inc | 335 | -29.60 % |
| 47 | Asp Isotopes Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 48 | Orion S a | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 49 | Cyber App Solutions Corp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 50 | Braskem Sa | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 51 | Nl Industries inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Gevo Inc'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.
Gevo Inc'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 | 47.35 % | 30.74 % (avg) | +16.6 pp |
| Operating Margin | -102.80 % | industry median | -105.8 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | -82.93 % | 3.22 % (avg) | -86.1 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 22.76 % | 7.98 % (avg) | +14.8 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.
Gevo Inc'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 | - | 27.8x | - |
| EV / EBITDA | - | 16.1x | - |
| P/B | 0.9x | 3.9x | -2.9x |
| Return on Equity | -51.01 % | industry aggregate | -53.81 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -18.27 % | 0.90 % (avg) | -19.17 % |
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.
Gevo Inc's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 1.19 % | 21.32 % | -26.70 % | -77.39 % | -87.16 % | 500.00 % | -1.66 % | 500.00 % |
| Operating Margin | -84.55 % | -66.11 % | -107.61 % | -475.70 % | -8,451.48 % | -475.78 % | -536.94 % | -12.59 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -15.74 % | -11.97 % | -15.74 % | -12.94 % | -4.98 % | -6.98 % | -8.26 % | -1.84 % |
| P/E | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
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.
Gevo Inc's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Gevo Inc's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Gevo Inc is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Gevo Inc's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Gevo Inc'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.
Gevo Inc falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.00x 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.
Gevo Inc'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 | High (capital intensive) | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 22.76 % vs industry average 7.98 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Gevo Inc's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Gevo Inc'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.
Gevo Inc'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.
Gevo Inc 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.
Gevo Inc'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
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+4.8% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Operating margin 105.8 points below the industry median.
- Return on equity 53.8 points below the industry aggregate.
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.00x).
Opportunities
- A meaningful share of tracked competitors (37.10 %) show financial-distress signals, a possible opening to gain share.
Threats
- Industry dominated by Linde Plc, holding 41.32 % of industry market cap.
- High capital intensity requires continuous reinvestment just to keep pace with the industry.
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.
Gevo Inc'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | 1.62 | 2.32 | 0.34 |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 0.47 | 1.36 | 0.36 |
| Ecopetrol S a | 0.11 | 0.54 | 0.95 |
| Ppg Industries Inc | 0.34 | 1.52 | 0.91 |
| Dow Inc | 0.37 | 1.86 | 0.99 |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | 0.39 | 1.63 | 1.52 |
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.
Gevo Inc'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | Q2 2026 | +7.1 % | - |
| Archer daniels midland Co | Q2 2026 | +7.2 % | +320.3 % |
| Ecopetrol S a | Q4 2025 | -10.2 % | -21.9 % |
| Ppg Industries Inc | Q1 2026 | +6.7 % | +1.9 % |
| Dow Inc | Q1 2026 | -6.1 % | - |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | Q2 2026 | +19.8 % | +386.1 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | -1.5 % | +22.7 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Gevo Inc'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | Q2 2026 | +15.4 % | +138.3 % |
| Archer daniels midland Co | Q2 2026 | +4.8 % | -10.8 % |
| Ecopetrol S a | Q4 2025 | -5.1 % | +2.6 % |
| Ppg Industries Inc | Q1 2026 | +6.2 % | -6.2 % |
| Dow Inc | Q1 2026 | -6.2 % | -26.7 % |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | Q2 2026 | +3.9 % | -49.9 % |
Gevo Inc's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | - | - | - |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 3.33% | 5.61% | 7.77% |
| Ecopetrol S a | 5.12% | 7.30% | 13.53% |
| Ppg Industries Inc | 7.23% | 9.42% | 19.96% |
| Dow Inc | - | - | - |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | - | - | - |
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).
Gevo Inc's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Gevo inc | - | 1.79 |
| Archer daniels midland Co | 22.03 | 0.47 |
| Ecopetrol S a | 127.90 | 1.13 |
| Ppg Industries Inc | 15.29 | 1.49 |
| Dow Inc | - | 0.51 |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | - | 0.60 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 60.82 | 0.89 |
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.
