Advertisement
FUL vs NGVT
Which Stock Would AI Choose? H.B. Fuller (FUL) vs. Ingevity (NGVT) Stock Comparison
Key Takeaways
- FUL delivered robust margin expansion and double-digit adjusted EPS (earnings per share) growth in its latest fiscal year despite flat organic revenue, reflecting operational discipline and portfolio repositioning.
- NGVT is undergoing a significant strategic transformation, including divestitures and exploration of alternatives for challenged segments, while generating strong free cash flow and rapidly deleveraging its balance sheet.
- FUL trades at a lower forward P/E (price-to-earnings) ratio of approximately 10.85, offers a dividend yield near 1.76%, and focuses on steady operational improvement in the adhesives and specialty chemicals space.
- NGVT has posted stronger trailing share-price momentum — up roughly 46% over the past year — but carries higher uncertainty due to ongoing portfolio restructuring and exposure to tariff-sensitive automotive and industrial end markets.
- Both companies operate in the specialty materials sector, yet they appeal to different investor profiles: FUL suits those seeking value, income, and margin-driven stability, while NGVT attracts those positioned for turnaround and capital appreciation potential.
Introduction
In the specialty chemicals and materials sector, FUL and NGVT represent two distinct investment narratives. H.B. Fuller Company, with a market capitalization near $3.0 billion, is a global leader in adhesives, sealants, and specialty chemical products serving industries from packaging to electronics. Ingevity Corporation, valued at approximately $2.46 billion, operates across performance materials, advanced polymers, and pavement technologies, with significant exposure to automotive supply chains. This stock comparison is relevant for investors evaluating relative performance, market positioning, and the trade-offs between a margin-expansion story (FUL) and a portfolio-restructuring turnaround (NGVT). Both stocks have navigated challenging macroeconomic conditions in recent quarters, making their diverging paths a useful case study in sector-level resilience.
FUL Overview and Recent Performance
FUL — H.B. Fuller Company — is a St. Paul, Minnesota-based formulator and manufacturer of adhesives, sealants, coatings, and other specialty chemical products. The company operates through three global business units: Hygiene, Health and Consumable Adhesives (HHC), Engineering Adhesives (EA), and Building Adhesives & Solutions (BAS). In its fiscal year 2025 (ended November 29, 2025), the company reported net revenue of $3.47 billion, down approximately 2.7% year-over-year, though adjusting for a flooring business divestiture, net revenue was up 1.8%. More importantly, adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) rose 4.5% to $621 million, with adjusted EBITDA margin expanding 130 basis points to 17.9%. Fourth-quarter adjusted EPS surged 39% year-over-year to $1.28, driven by favorable pricing, raw material cost actions, and restructuring benefits. CEO Celeste Mastin pointed to strong momentum exiting the year, with the company targeting more than 20% EBITDA margin. For fiscal 2026, management guided to adjusted EPS of $4.35–$4.70 and flat to modest organic revenue growth. The stock has traded in a 52-week range of approximately $48.71–$68.63, recently hovering around the $55–$56 level, and carries a forward P/E of roughly 10.85 with a dividend yield near 1.76%.
NGVT Overview and Recent Performance
NGVT — Ingevity Corporation — is a North Charleston, South Carolina-based specialty materials company with three core segments: Performance Materials (primarily activated carbon-based products for automotive emissions control), Advanced Polymer Technologies (APT), and Performance Chemicals (including pavement technologies and road markings). The company has been executing a significant portfolio transformation. In early 2026, Ingevity completed the sale of its North Charleston crude tall oil refinery and the majority of its Industrial Specialties product line for $110 million, while also announcing it is exploring strategic alternatives for its APT segment and Road Markings product line. For full-year 2025, Ingevity reported total net sales of approximately $1.29 billion (including discontinued operations) and a GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) net loss of $167.1 million, driven largely by non-cash impairment charges — including a $183.8 million goodwill impairment in APT. However, total adjusted EBITDA rose 10% to $397.5 million, and free cash flow surged to $274 million, the highest level in five years. Net leverage improved sharply from 3.5x to 2.6x. The 2026 outlook calls for net sales of $1.1–$1.2 billion and adjusted EBITDA of $380–$400 million. The stock has been a strong performer, gaining roughly 46% over the past year, with a 52-week range of approximately $39.74–$79.29.
Trending AI Robots
For traders seeking data-driven decision support, Tickeron's Trending AI Robots page offers a curated selection of the platform's top-performing AI-powered trading bots. Tickeron hosts hundreds of AI trading bots covering thousands of tickers, but only those demonstrating the strongest alignment with current market conditions earn a place in this featured section. These bots employ diverse trading styles — from swing trading and trend-following to rapid 5-minute and 15-minute interval strategies — and have posted annualized returns ranging from over 50% to upwards of 200% in certain sector-focused configurations, with win rates reaching as high as 67% and profit factors exceeding 4.5 in some cases. Each bot operates on proprietary Financial Learning Models (FLMs) that continuously adapt to evolving price action and volatility patterns across different timeframes and sets of tickers. Whether you are focused on industrial stocks, specialty chemicals, or broad market ETFs, exploring the Trending AI Robots page can help identify which AI-driven strategies are best positioned for the current environment.
Head-to-Head Comparison
While both FUL and NGVT compete broadly in the specialty materials space, their business models, growth drivers, and risk profiles differ substantially. H.B. Fuller operates a diversified adhesives portfolio with relatively steady demand across packaging, hygiene, electronics, automotive, aerospace, and construction end markets. Its recent performance has been defined by margin expansion through pricing discipline, raw material cost management, and an ongoing manufacturing footprint consolidation initiative called "Quantum Leap." The company is also an active consolidator, having completed multiple bolt-on acquisitions in medical adhesives and fastener coating systems, while divesting lower-margin businesses like flooring. Revenue growth remains muted, but profitability trajectory is improving.
Ingevity, by contrast, is a more concentrated business with heavy reliance on automotive production cycles through its Performance Materials segment — which accounts for roughly half of sales and delivers EBITDA margins above 50%. The company's APT segment has been a persistent drag, facing indirect tariff impacts, weak industrial demand, and heightened competition in China. The Road Markings business has also faced competitive pricing pressure. Management is actively reshaping the portfolio, having already divested the Industrial Specialties business and signaled potential exits from APT and Road Markings. This restructuring creates both opportunity and uncertainty — the balance sheet has strengthened considerably, but the ultimate earnings profile of the streamlined company remains undefined. From a market sentiment standpoint, NGVT has enjoyed stronger price momentum over the past twelve months, while FUL has been range-bound despite solid execution, with analysts maintaining a consensus price target implying meaningful upside.
Tickeron AI Verdict
Based on observable factors including trend consistency, earnings quality, and relative risk-adjusted positioning, Tickeron's AI would likely favor FUL in the current market environment. H.B. Fuller's combination of expanding margins, a clear pathway to its stated 20%-plus EBITDA margin target, disciplined capital allocation, and a reasonable forward valuation (forward P/E near 10.85 with a stable dividend) presents a more predictable risk-reward profile. While NGVT offers compelling upside potential — particularly if portfolio streamlining unlocks value and the automotive cycle strengthens — the ongoing restructuring introduces execution risk, and substantial non-cash impairment charges have clouded reported earnings. The AI would likely recognize NGVT's stronger price momentum and improving free cash flow generation as positive signals, but would assign greater probabilistic weight to FUL's steadier fundamental trend, lower earnings volatility, and clearer near-term catalysts. That said, neither stock is without risk, and relative attractiveness may shift based on evolving macroeconomic data and sector-specific developments.
Disclaimer
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.
To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is FUL is a StrongBuy and NGVT is a Buy.
Long-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).
FUL’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileNGVT’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- FUL’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- NGVT’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
Short-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.
If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.
FUL’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while NGVT’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).
- FUL’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 6 bearish.
- NGVT’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 2 bearish.
Price Growth
FUL (@Chemicals: Specialty) experienced а +2.75% price change this week, while NGVT (@Chemicals: Specialty) price change was -1.35% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Chemicals: Specialty industry was +0.87%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.26%, and the average quarterly price growth was +6.21%.
Reported Earning Dates
FUL is expected to report earnings on Sep 30, 2026.
NGVT is expected to report earnings on Nov 04, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Chemicals: Specialty (+0.87% weekly)The specialty chemicals sector includes companies that produce chemicals and industrial gases, which are of relatively high-value, often made to customer specifications. Examples of specialty chemicals are electronic chemicals, industrial gases, coatings, adhesives and sealants, industrial and institutional cleaning chemicals. The products are often valued on the basis of their purposes/performances rather than for their composition. Linde Plc, Ecolab Inc., Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., and Dow, Inc. are some of the largest companies making specialty chemicals.
| FUL | NGVT | FUL / NGVT | |
| Capitalization | 3.38B | 2.64B | 128% |
| EBITDA | 559M | 207M | 270% |
| Gain YTD | 6.811 | 29.723 | 23% |
| P/E Ratio | 18.62 | 108.13 | 17% |
| Revenue | 3.51B | 1.16B | 302% |
| Total Cash | 114M | 97.4M | 117% |
| Total Debt | 2.07B | 1.24B | 168% |
FUL | NGVT | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 11 | 26 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 33 Fair valued | 99 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 90 | 98 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 74 | 18 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 49 | 47 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 90 | 13 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 50 |
Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.
FUL's Valuation (33) in the Industrial Specialties industry is significantly better than the same rating for NGVT (99) in the Chemicals Major Diversified industry. This means that FUL’s stock grew significantly faster than NGVT’s over the last 12 months.
FUL's Profit vs Risk Rating (90) in the Industrial Specialties industry is in the same range as NGVT (98) in the Chemicals Major Diversified industry. This means that FUL’s stock grew similarly to NGVT’s over the last 12 months.
NGVT's SMR Rating (18) in the Chemicals Major Diversified industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FUL (74) in the Industrial Specialties industry. This means that NGVT’s stock grew somewhat faster than FUL’s over the last 12 months.
NGVT's Price Growth Rating (47) in the Chemicals Major Diversified industry is in the same range as FUL (49) in the Industrial Specialties industry. This means that NGVT’s stock grew similarly to FUL’s over the last 12 months.
NGVT's P/E Growth Rating (13) in the Chemicals Major Diversified industry is significantly better than the same rating for FUL (90) in the Industrial Specialties industry. This means that NGVT’s stock grew significantly faster than FUL’s over the last 12 months.
| FUL | NGVT | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 77% | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 56% | 3 days ago 69% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 64% | 3 days ago 67% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 59% | 3 days ago 77% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 57% | 3 days ago 72% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 56% | 3 days ago 67% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 53% | 10 days ago 74% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 59% | 4 days ago 70% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 67% | 3 days ago 87% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 67% | N/A |
Advertisement
FUL and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FUL has been closely correlated with RPM. These tickers have moved in lockstep 75% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if FUL jumps, then RPM could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FUL | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FUL | 100% | +4.32% | ||
| RPM - FUL | 75% Closely correlated | +0.43% | ||
| PPG - FUL | 69% Closely correlated | -0.54% | ||
| AVNT - FUL | 67% Closely correlated | +0.48% | ||
| IOSP - FUL | 66% Closely correlated | -0.07% | ||
| OLN - FUL | 65% Loosely correlated | +0.21% | ||
More | ||||
NGVT and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, NGVT has been loosely correlated with AVNT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 62% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if NGVT jumps, then AVNT could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To NGVT | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NGVT | 100% | +1.91% | ||
| AVNT - NGVT | 62% Loosely correlated | +0.48% | ||
| FUL - NGVT | 61% Loosely correlated | +4.32% | ||
| MTX - NGVT | 58% Loosely correlated | +0.47% | ||
| KWR - NGVT | 57% Loosely correlated | -0.41% | ||
| EMN - NGVT | 56% Loosely correlated | +0.41% | ||
More | ||||