Only at a relatively high level, I have posted here previously....

Only at a relatively high level, I have posted here previously. E25 will outperform EMN on all fronts IMO, but they are further along in the process probably why not reflected in the market cap.

Quality - I guess this refers to purity, it's kind of binary - do we meet the specifications required by whoever will buy it or not? at 99.95% there will be buyers, maybe some will be looking for 99.99% which I'm not sure we can get, maybe EMN can?

Production - Ability to leach in 60 mins should be a game changer, i'm not sure of the EMN benchmark but suspect its more like 24hrs??
EMN are also constrained by the size and content of their tailings deposit. It has a limited life and far less contained Mn than E25 has access to. The grade of their tailings is troubling v E25. Say it is 10% (I think its less) feed grade, you need to process through the battery grade plant 3x more material to get the same amount of contained Manganese out. If costs are on par, that means 3x the cost.

Costs are not on par. EMN plan to produce HPMSM and HPEMM, including some HPMSM from dissolving HPEMM. The cost of producing HPMSM directly from a Manganese ore will always be the cheapest option, as it doesn't involve the expensive electrowinning or blast furnace.
Why would you not always do directly to HPMSM? I'm guessing this is down to ore characteristics. EMN can do some of their carbonate (ie soluble) ore directly as HPMSM, but not all of it - i'm guessing due to containing deleterious materials in the deposit (afterall its an old tailings, ie waste, dump). For a portion of their ore I suspect ONLY electrowinning is capable of achieving the 99.95% purity hence why they do it.

ESG - the above points all feed into this.
EMN have said they are environmentally friendly as a result of processing an existing tailings facility rather than mining fresh ore. That is true and a good story, but get crosses against them for 1) flow sheet that requires high level of electricity consumption (did someone say its power is provided by a coal power staiton???) 2) low head grade = low productivity levels, fewer tonnes produced per tonnes of feed material v E25 3) standing up a whole facility for 15 years of processing v E25 potential life long operation

I've probably missed heaps, @suzywongs chime in