To address the issue that most existing studies mainly focus on the sulfate attack resistance of cement-stabilized soil,while insufficient attention has been paid to soil reinforced by new curing agents,this paper conducts a comparative experimental study on the sulfate erosion resistance of soil stabilized with the two materials.With different sulfate concentrations and two erosion modes adopted,systematic tests are carried out on the two stabilized soils at different erosion ages.By observing surface morphology,testing unconfined compressive strength,calculating the sulfate resistance coefficient,and analyzing microstructure via scanning electron microscopy (SEM),the performance evolution law and erosion failure mechanism are comprehensively revealed.The results show that low sulfate concentrations (≤3,000 mg/L) have little effect on both types of stabilized soil,with performance degradation rates all less than 20%.Under high-concentration sulfate erosion (≥8,000 mg/L),cement-stabilized soil deteriorates rapidly,and the degradation intensifies with erosion age,its unconfined compressive strength decreases by up to 100%,and the sulfate resistance coefficient drops to a minimum of 0.In comparison,stabilized soil presents superior erosion resistance,with its minimum corrosion resistance coefficient reaching only 0.49 under long-term semi-immersion conditions.Stabilized soil overall outperforms cement soil in erosion resistance.This is mainly attributed to the lower content of aluminum-phase hydration products inside stabilized soil,which effectively inhibits the formation of expansive secondary ettringite in the later stage.