Agricultural giant Corteva is exploring a potential separation of its seed and crop protection businesses, a move that could reshape the landscape of global agriculture technology and respond to mounting investor pressure for stronger returns.
According to sources familiar with the matter, Corteva’s leadership team is working with financial advisors to evaluate strategic alternatives for the company’s two primary business segments. This potential restructuring comes amid intensifying competition in the agricultural inputs market and shifting farmer preferences worldwide.
The Delaware-based company, which generated $17.4 billion in revenue last year, has been facing growing scrutiny from shareholders dissatisfied with its stock performance since its 2019 spinoff from DowDuPont. Shares have climbed about 10% year-to-date, underperforming the broader S&P 500’s 18% gain during the same period.
“This potential separation reflects ongoing consolidation and specialization trends across the agricultural inputs sector,” said Maria Ramirez, agricultural economist at Northeastern University. “Companies are increasingly focused on becoming best-in-class in specific domains rather than attempting to excel across multiple agricultural technologies.”
The seed business, which includes the Pioneer brand and Brevant seeds, represents approximately 45% of Corteva’s annual sales. Its crop protection segment, encompassing herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, accounts for the remaining 55%.
Industry analysts note the two divisions face distinctly different market dynamics and innovation cycles. Seed development typically requires longer research timelines and significant regulatory hurdles, particularly for genetically modified varieties. Crop protection products, while also heavily regulated, often follow different commercialization pathways.
“Splitting these businesses could potentially unlock value by allowing each entity to pursue more focused innovation strategies and capital allocation priorities,” explained James Henderson, portfolio manager at Agricultural Asset Management. “The crop protection business might benefit from greater flexibility in pursuing acquisitions in specialty chemicals, while the seed business could accelerate investments in gene-editing technologies.”
The potential restructuring comes amid broader transformations in agricultural technology, with increased emphasis on sustainability and biological alternatives to traditional chemical inputs. Farmers worldwide are navigating climate challenges while facing pressure to reduce environmental impacts.
Corteva’s deliberations remain preliminary, and the company may ultimately decide against any structural changes, according to people familiar with the discussions. The board is reportedly weighing multiple scenarios, including a complete separation into two independent public companies or maintaining the current integrated structure with operational improvements.
The company’s leadership declined to comment on “market rumors or speculation” but emphasized its commitment to “creating shareholder value through strategic focus and operational excellence.”
This potential split mirrors similar moves across the agricultural inputs sector in recent years. German conglomerate Bayer has faced investor pressure to separate its pharmaceutical and agricultural businesses following its troubled acquisition of Monsanto. Meanwhile, FMC Corporation has increasingly focused its portfolio on crop protection after divesting its lithium business.
According to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, farmers spent approximately $29.6 billion on seeds and $20.2 billion on crop protection chemicals last year, highlighting the substantial market opportunity in both segments.
Financial analysts at Morgan Stanley estimate that a separation could potentially create 15-20% additional shareholder value through improved operational focus and more targeted capital allocation. However, the firm also warns of potential risks, including loss of cross-selling opportunities and increased vulnerability to agricultural market cycles.
“The agricultural inputs business is fundamentally cyclical,” noted William Chen, agricultural market analyst at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. “Smaller, more focused entities might face greater challenges navigating these cycles compared to a diversified agricultural technology provider.”
Corteva faces additional complexities from ongoing supply chain disruptions and geopolitical tensions affecting global agricultural markets. The company sources raw materials from multiple continents and sells products in more than 140 countries.
Farmers, the ultimate customers for both business segments, have expressed mixed reactions to the potential split. “We value having a single relationship for both seed and crop protection needs,” said Iowa corn grower Sarah Mitchell. “But ultimately, what matters most is product performance and value, regardless of corporate structure.”
The timing of any announcement remains uncertain, though sources suggest the company could provide additional details during its upcoming quarterly earnings call. Regulatory approvals would likely extend any formal separation process by 12-18 months from announcement.
Whatever path Corteva chooses, the decision will have far-reaching implications for agricultural technology innovation, farmer choices, and food security at a time when global agricultural systems face unprecedented challenges from climate change and population growth.
