Varamir
Desk
News
Calendar
Pricing
Saved
Search
tickers or companies
⌘K
Start free
· no card
Sign in
UL compared with MTB: revenue, margins and what each company keeps, and the suppliers and customers both name
UL
Unilever PLC
Change
Mkt cap
Revenue
Revenue
MTB
M&T Bank Corp
Change
Mkt cap
Revenue
Revenue
vs
Compare
UL
Unilever PLC
vs
MTB
M&T Bank Corp
Price
Mkt cap
Revenue
Revenue
Change
Change
Revenue flow
Supply chain
Price
Co-movers
Event sensitivity
Earnings history
Save comparison
Copy link
Revenue flow
Desk
News
Calendar
Saved
Search
Revenue flow
Supply chain
Price
Co-movers
Event sensitivity
Earnings history
Price
rebased to 0%
1D
1W
1M
3M
YTD
1Y
5Y
1D
1W
1M
3M
YTD
1Y
5Y
UL, solid
MTB, dashed
Supply-chain overlap
Revenue flow
UL: latest quarter not drawable. MTB: latest quarter not drawable.
Method
›
Supply-chain overlap
direct ties · both sides
Sources
›
direct ties · both sides
Only UL
2
PEP
PepsiCo
supplier
J
Jacobs Solutions
supplier
Shared
0
No shared counterparties.
Only MTB
2
LPLA
LPL Financial
supplier
MBUU
Malibu Boats
customer
Role chip = supplier or customer
Source: SEC EDGAR
UL
Unilever PLC
Change
65.27
▲
+1.69%
· post 65.45
Mkt cap
$142.3B
Revenue
—
Revenue
—
MTB
M&T Bank Corp
Change
220.21
▼
−1.72%
· post 220.21
Closed
Oct 30 '26
Mkt cap
$31.9B
Revenue
$2.5B
Q2 FY26
Revenue
$9.7B
FY25
vs
Compare
Closed
Oct 30 '26
UL
Unilever PLC
vs
MTB
M&T Bank Corp
65.27
▲
+1.69%
post 65.45
Price
220.21
▼
−1.72%
post 220.21
$142.3B
Mkt cap
$31.9B
—
Revenue
$2.5B
Q2 FY26
—
Revenue
$9.7B
FY25
Change
Change
UL
65.27
▲
+1.69%
vs
MTB
220.21
▼
−1.72%
Closed
Oct 30 '26