The Idiot Index
Operational Markup in Materials & Chemicals · FY 2023
25 of 38 companies · highest first- 11.4815× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 21.4782× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 31.3084× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 41.2986× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 51.2732× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 61.2579× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 71.2442× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 81.2164× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 91.2039× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
- 101.1875× revenue / (cost + opex)verified
Not yet covered (13)
These companies are in the Materials & Chemicals cohort but don't have a Operational Markup computed for FY 2023. Either the underlying inputs aren't tagged in their XBRL filings, the DEF 14A pay-ratio narrative didn't parse cleanly, or this fiscal year hasn't been ingested for them yet.
What this measures
Full methodology →Revenue per dollar of cost + operating expenses. The multiplier after legitimate operations.
- Ratio
- Operational Markup
- Sector
- Materials & Chemicals
- Methodology version
- v1.0.0
Applied to chemicals, industrial gases, mining, metals, and packaging companies. COGS captures raw material extraction, refining, and primary processing — this sector is the "stuff that becomes other stuff" layer of the economy. Markup ratios are cyclical with commodity input costs; sector medians are the right comparison. Shareholder Extraction is informative because materials companies face structural choices between buybacks and reinvestment in capacity.
The multiplier after legitimate operations. A high Markup combined with a low Operational Markup tells a specific story: surplus is being reinvested in the business. A high Markup combined with a high Operational Markup tells the opposite story: surplus is going to shareholders.
Source data: Revenues, CostOfGoodsAndServicesSold, OperatingExpenses (us-gaap) or equivalents in IFRS.