Evonik's Owner Question: A 44% Stake, a Union Rebuke, and the Ashland Card Still in Play

The loudest argument around Evonik right now is BASF's €22.15-per-share offer, but a quieter one may matter more over time: what its largest shareholder actually intends to do with the company. IG BCE chief Michael Vassiliadis turned up the heat this week, accusing the RAG-Stiftung of failing to invest actively in its most important holding — and ruling himself out of any leadership role at the foundation in no uncertain terms.

The RAG-Stiftung owns roughly 44% of Evonik and channels the dividends it receives into funding the perpetual obligations left behind by hard-coal mining. Vassiliadis's complaint targets that owner strategy directly. For shareholders, the distinction he draws is worth keeping straight: how the foundation spends Evonik's payouts and whether it is prepared to put money back into the business are two separate questions. He fuses them into a single critique of the foundation's direction so far, while his flat refusal of a foundation job keeps that critique at arm's length from any personal ambition.

Two value propositions, side by side

Set against that backdrop, Evonik is weighing a move of its own. According to a Handelsblatt report, the group is examining an acquisition of US specialty chemicals firm Ashland — a review that insiders say has been underway for months, predating BASF's approach in late September. Evonik enlisted Perella Weinberg Partners and JP Morgan to scout the target and denies that Ashland is being studied as a defensive maneuver. The timing matters: a deal would not automatically be a knee-jerk response to BASF, but a strategic path in its own right. Whether it holds up economically would come down to the terms.

The price tag is the crux. Ashland carries a market capitalization of about $3.3 billion, or roughly $4.3 billion including net debt. Insiders expect a premium of around 30% to seal a deal, which would push the equity purchase price above $4 billion. A geographically neat fit is not the same thing as a value-creating one, and Evonik has signaled it wants to avoid overpaying. Competition could complicate that discipline: Ashland has been exploring sale options since August, with Advent, Apollo and Carlyle named alongside Evonik as interested parties. A disciplined walk-away might ultimately say more to investors than a winning bid at inflated terms.

Should investors sell immediately? Or is it worth buying Evonik?

Where the map points

The strategic case rests on Evonik's regional revenue split. In 2025, 48% came from Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and 29% from the Americas. Over the long run, the company is aiming for roughly a third each in Europe, the Americas and Asia. Buying a US business would advance that rebalancing — and, in the best case, give Evonik a credible alternative to merging with BASF, provided the benefits justify both the purchase price and the strain of integration.

BASF's opening bid of €22.15 per Evonik share values the equity at around €10.3 billion. Evonik considers the offer too low, and the RAG-Stiftung has already rejected it. According to RNZ, BASF could still raise its bid — a possibility, not a decision. Layered on top are BASF's employment pledges: CEO Markus Kamieth has ruled out compulsory redundancies through 2032 and committed to leaving collective agreements and social partnership untouched. Those promises address jobs and implementation, not shareholder value directly, and they leave open the question of what terms the foundation would accept for a combination.

The cost of conviction

The counterargument to the Ashland path is financial strain. A generous deal could tie up the flexibility Evonik needs for its own restructuring, which already envisions cutting 3,200 jobs by 2029, about 2,150 of them in Germany. A bigger US footprint would not offset that burden by itself; any strategically sound transaction would still have to earn back its cost through future earnings.

Evonik at a turning point? This analysis reveals what investors need to know now.

Vassiliadis, who also sits on BASF's supervisory board, wants sites and jobs safeguarded in any BASF-Evonik combination — a position that reaches beyond price to the consequences of a deal. He leaves the room and receives no documents when the board discusses Evonik. For investors, the debate therefore runs past the size of a takeover premium to two deeper questions: what future the existing anchor shareholder envisions for its stake, and what conditions employee representatives will attach to any change of ownership.

Until Evonik either confirms terms or steps back from the Ashland talks, the review is best treated as an open option rather than an imminent transaction. The decisive measure is not the scale of a possible purchase but the economic value Evonik could get in return — and whether its owner is willing to back that bet.

Ad

Evonik Stock: New Analysis - 23 October

Fresh Evonik information released. What's the impact for investors? Our latest independent report examines recent figures and market trends.

Read our updated Evonik analysis...