Advertisement
FUL vs SHW
Which Stock Would AI Choose? H.B. Fuller (FUL) vs. Sherwin-Williams (SHW) Stock Comparison
Key Takeaways
- Different scale, same materials theme: FUL is a focused adhesives and sealants specialist, while SHW is a diversified paints and coatings giant with a market value near $86 billion.
- Contrasting top-line momentum: SHW posted mid-single-digit revenue growth in its latest quarter, while FUL's revenue declined as it repositioned its portfolio.
- Both are expanding margins: Each company reported meaningful profitability gains despite soft end-market demand.
- SHW shows stronger cash generation: Sherwin-Williams generated about $2.7 billion in free cash flow for the year, far exceeding H.B. Fuller's scale.
- Balance-sheet quality differs: SHW's net-debt-to-adjusted-EBITDA leverage of 2.3x is notably lower than FUL's 3.1x.
- Risk profiles diverge: FUL is executing a portfolio transformation and de-emphasizing solar, while SHW is integrating a major acquisition and managing housing-market exposure.
Introduction
H.B. Fuller (FUL) and The Sherwin-Williams Company (SHW) both operate in the specialty-materials and coatings space, yet they occupy very different positions in the market. This stock comparison is relevant for investors evaluating relative performance and market positioning between a mid-cap adhesives pure-play and a large-cap coatings leader. Both companies face a "softer-for-longer" demand environment, making their pricing power, cost discipline, and strategic execution key differentiators. Traders monitoring momentum, and long-term investors weighing stability against transformation, may find this head-to-head comparison useful in understanding how these two names stack up today.
FUL Overview and Recent Performance
H.B. Fuller is the world's largest pure-play adhesives company, founded in 1887 and serving more than 30 market segments across roughly 150 countries with annual revenue of about $3.5 billion. Its business spans three units: Hygiene, Health and Consumable Adhesives; Engineering Adhesives; and Building Adhesive Solutions.
In recent market activity, FUL has been defined by margin expansion rather than revenue growth. In its fiscal fourth quarter, net revenue fell about 3.1% year over year, while adjusted earnings per share (EPS, profit attributable to each share) rose roughly 39%. Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) increased about 15%, lifting the EBITDA margin to approximately 19%. Management attributed the gains to pricing discipline, raw-material savings, restructuring, and acquisitions, even as volumes declined. The company has also been de-emphasizing its solar business and consolidating its manufacturing footprint. These factors, together with a leverage ratio of 3.1x, have shaped sentiment around FUL as a self-help turnaround story.
SHW Overview and Recent Performance
Sherwin-Williams is a diversified global paints and coatings manufacturer with a market capitalization near $86 billion, and it is celebrating 160 years in business. Its reportable segments are Paint Stores Group, Consumer Brands Group, and Performance Coatings Group.
In its latest quarter, SHW delivered net sales of about $5.60 billion, up 5.6% year over year, and adjusted EPS of $2.23 that exceeded consensus estimates. Adjusted EBITDA grew roughly 13.4%, with the margin expanding to 17.7% of sales. For the full year, the company reported record sales and record adjusted EPS, generated about $2.7 billion in free cash flow, and returned $2.5 billion to shareholders. Notably, the company raised its dividend for a 47th consecutive year and completed its acquisition of Brazil-based paint maker Suvinil. Growth was led by protective and marine coatings and residential repaint, while demand for new residential and do-it-yourself categories remained subdued. Leverage stood at a relatively conservative 2.3x net debt to adjusted EBITDA.
Trending AI Robots
For traders who prefer a data-driven approach to stock selection, Tickeron's Trending AI Robots page offers a curated view of the platform's top-performing automated strategies. Tickeron hosts hundreds of AI Trading Bots that trade thousands of different tickers, each with its own trading style, strategy, timeframe, performance statistics, and set of securities. Because not every bot suits every market condition, only the most appropriate and best-performing strategies earn a place in the Trending AI Robots section. The selection highlights bots with strong recent records and configurations aligned to current market dynamics, helping users quickly identify strategies worth monitoring. Explore the Trending AI Robots page to see which automated approaches are currently leading the field.
Head-to-Head Comparison
The core contrast between these two names is scale versus focus. SHW is a diversified leader with a dominant North American store network, substantial free cash flow, and pricing power across consumer and industrial coatings. FUL is a smaller, more specialized adhesives business undergoing active portfolio reshaping.
Growth drivers also differ. SHW's momentum is tied to protective and marine coatings, residential repaint share gains, and the Suvinil integration in Latin America. FUL's path is driven by engineering adhesives exposure to automotive, electronics, and aerospace, alongside acquisitions and margin improvement.
Risk factors diverge as well. SHW faces housing-market cyclicality, raw-material inflation tied to tariffs, and acquisition integration costs. FUL carries higher leverage, softer construction-related volumes, and execution risk around its transformation and solar wind-down. In terms of market sentiment, SHW is generally viewed as a steadier, cash-generative compounder, while FUL is often framed as a higher-beta recovery and margin-expansion story.
Tickeron AI Verdict
Based on observable factors such as trend consistency, balance-sheet stability, cash generation, and the breadth of catalysts, Tickeron's AI would likely lean toward SHW in the current environment. Sherwin-Williams combines positive revenue growth with expanding margins, a lower leverage profile, and a long track record of returning capital to shareholders. That said, the verdict is probabilistic rather than definitive. FUL presents a potentially higher-upside turnaround scenario if its margin expansion and portfolio reshaping continue to gain traction. The choice ultimately depends on whether an investor prioritizes stability and relative positioning or a transformation story with greater volatility.
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 Hold and SHW is a Hold.
FUL | SHW | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 5 | 65 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 32 Undervalued | 90 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 82 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 73 | 18 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 72 | 56 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 92 | 49 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 75 | 75 |
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 (32) in the Industrial Specialties industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SHW (90). This means that FUL’s stock grew somewhat faster than SHW’s over the last 12 months.
SHW's Profit vs Risk Rating (82) in the Industrial Specialties industry is in the same range as FUL (100). This means that SHW’s stock grew similarly to FUL’s over the last 12 months.
SHW's SMR Rating (18) in the Industrial Specialties industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FUL (73). This means that SHW’s stock grew somewhat faster than FUL’s over the last 12 months.
SHW's Price Growth Rating (56) in the Industrial Specialties industry is in the same range as FUL (72). This means that SHW’s stock grew similarly to FUL’s over the last 12 months.
SHW's P/E Growth Rating (49) in the Industrial Specialties industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FUL (92). This means that SHW’s stock grew somewhat faster than FUL’s over the last 12 months.
| FUL | SHW | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 59% | 2 days ago 66% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 62% | 2 days ago 62% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 65% | 2 days ago 65% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 64% | 2 days ago 55% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 60% | 2 days ago 58% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 58% | 2 days ago 51% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 8 days ago 55% | 16 days ago 58% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 60% | 9 days ago 65% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 64% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 64% | 2 days ago 47% |
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 overvalued. 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 while SHW’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- FUL’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- SHW’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 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 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SHW’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- FUL’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
- SHW’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
FUL (@Chemicals: Specialty) experienced а -2.20% price change this week, while SHW (@Chemicals: Specialty) price change was +0.55% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Chemicals: Specialty industry was -2.56%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.88%, and the average quarterly price growth was -1.81%.
Reported Earning Dates
FUL is expected to report earnings on Jan 20, 2027.
SHW is expected to report earnings on Oct 27, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Chemicals: Specialty (-2.56% 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.
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 71% 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% | -0.46% | ||
| RPM - FUL | 71% Closely correlated | -0.16% | ||
| PPG - FUL | 68% Closely correlated | -0.24% | ||
| OLN - FUL | 65% Loosely correlated | -1.21% | ||
| AVNT - FUL | 65% Loosely correlated | +3.10% | ||
| ASIX - FUL | 64% Loosely correlated | -0.25% | ||
More | ||||
SHW and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SHW has been closely correlated with RPM. These tickers have moved in lockstep 78% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if SHW jumps, then RPM could also see price increases.