Asset Management
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
ASA vs NEM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gold
ASA vs NEM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Gold |
| Market Cap | $1.25B | $127.53B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $119M | $17.23B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $264M | $5.26B |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | 52.1% |
| Operating Margin | 96.9% | 49.3% |
| Forward P/E | 1653.6x | 11.0x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $474M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $7.65B |
ASA vs NEM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASA Gold and Precio… (ASA) | 100 | 435.6 | +335.6% |
| Newmont Corporation (NEM) | 100 | 196.9 | +96.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ASA vs NEM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ASA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 9.5%, EPS growth 11.1%
- 420.9% 10Y total return vs NEM's 271.4%
- 9.5% NII/revenue growth vs NEM's 19.1%
NEM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.75, yield 0.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.75, Low D/E 1.4%, current ratio 1.72x
- Beta 0.75, yield 0.9%, current ratio 1.72x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.5% NII/revenue growth vs NEM's 19.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.0x vs 1653.6x), PEG 0.86 vs 328.34 | |
| Quality / Margins | 96.9% margin vs NEM's 30.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.75 vs ASA's 0.87 | |
| Dividends | 0.9% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +116.8% vs NEM's +112.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 39.6% ROA vs NEM's 9.4%, ROIC 22.2% vs 24.9% |
ASA vs NEM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ASA vs NEM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ASA leads this category, winning 4 of 4 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NEM is the larger business by revenue, generating $17.2B annually — 144.8x ASA's $119M. ASA is the more profitable business, keeping 96.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NEM's 30.5%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $119M | $17.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$3M | $12.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $264M | $5.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | $12.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +100.0% | +52.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +96.9% | +49.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +96.9% | +30.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +75.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -100.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +47.0% | -100.0% |
Valuation Metrics
NEM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.0x trailing earnings, ASA trades at a 39% valuation discount to NEM's 18.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NEM offers better value at 1.40x vs ASA's 2.18x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.3B | $127.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.2B | $120.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 11.00x | 17.96x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1653.60x | 11.05x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.18x | 1.40x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.67x | 9.17x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.53x | 5.77x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.88x | 3.75x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 17.47x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — ASA and NEM each lead in 4 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ASA delivers a 39.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $40 in annual profit, vs $16 for NEM. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NEM scores 9/9 vs ASA's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +39.8% | +15.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +39.6% | +9.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +22.2% | +24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +29.5% | +20.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | -$7.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $7.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $474M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -56.37x | 50.54x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ASA leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ASA five years ago would be worth $29,497 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $18,360 for NEM. Over the past 12 months, ASA leads with a +116.8% total return vs NEM's +112.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ASA at 56.4% vs NEM's 34.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +14.5% | +14.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +116.8% | +112.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +282.3% | +145.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +195.0% | +83.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +420.9% | +271.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +56.4% | +34.9% |
Risk & Volatility
NEM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NEM is the less volatile stock with a 0.75 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ASA's 0.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NEM currently trades 85.3% from its 52-week high vs ASA's 80.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.87x | 0.75x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $83.20 | $134.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $28.04 | $48.27 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +80.1% | +85.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.0 | 46.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 64K | 9.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
NEM is the only dividend payer here at 0.87% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $137.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.00 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.8% |
ASA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). NEM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
ASA vs NEM: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ASA or NEM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is the stronger pick with 947.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 19. 1% for Newmont Corporation (NEM). ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) offers the better valuation at 11. 0x trailing P/E (1653. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Newmont Corporation (NEM) a "Buy" — based on 36 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — ASA or NEM?
On trailing P/E, ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is the cheapest at 11.
0x versus Newmont Corporation at 18. 0x. On forward P/E, Newmont Corporation is actually cheaper at 11. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Newmont Corporation wins at 0. 86x versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 328. 34x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ASA or NEM?
Over the past 5 years, ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) delivered a total return of +195.
0%, compared to +83. 6% for Newmont Corporation (NEM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ASA returned +420. 9% versus NEM's +271. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — ASA or NEM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
75β versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 0. 87β — meaning ASA is approximately 15% more volatile than NEM relative to the S&P 500.
05Which is growing faster — ASA or NEM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is pulling ahead at 947.
2% versus 19. 1% for Newmont Corporation (NEM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited grew EPS 1112% year-over-year, compared to 124. 1% for Newmont Corporation. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — ASA or NEM?
ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is the more profitable company, earning 96.
9% net margin versus 32. 1% for Newmont Corporation — meaning it keeps 96. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ASA leads at 96. 9% versus 46. 9% for NEM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ASA leads at 100. 0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is ASA or NEM more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 86x versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 328. 34x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Newmont Corporation (NEM) trades at 11. 0x forward P/E versus 1653. 6x for ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited — 1642. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — ASA or NEM?
In this comparison, NEM (0.
9% yield) pays a dividend. ASA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ASA or NEM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
75), 0. 9% yield, +271. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NEM: +271. 4%, ASA: +420. 9%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between ASA and NEM?
These companies operate in different sectors (ASA (Financial Services) and NEM (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
NEM pays a dividend while ASA does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.
Compare NEM vs AEM
AEM is one of the most direct listed alternatives to NEM.
Compare ASA vs AEM
AEM overlaps with ASA in an adjacent operating segment worth comparing.
Expand With AEM + KGC
AEM and KGC are the strongest missing peers across the current compare set.