Industrial Materials
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
NAK vs FCX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Copper
NAK vs FCX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial Materials | Copper |
| Market Cap | $1.14B | $98.32B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $26.42B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-40M | $2.73B |
| Gross Margin | — | 27.8% |
| Operating Margin | — | 27.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 25.7x |
| Total Debt | $3M | $11.50B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $55M | $3.35B |
NAK vs FCX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Northern Dynasty Mi… (NAK) | 100 | 142.7 | +42.7% |
| Freeport-McMoRan In… (FCX) | 100 | 591.3 | +491.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NAK vs FCX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NAK is the clearest fit if your priority is growth.
- 43.8% revenue growth vs FCX's 1.1%
FCX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 2.19, yield 0.9%
- Rev growth 1.1%, EPS growth 16.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.3%
- 5.9% 10Y total return vs NAK's 5.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 43.8% revenue growth vs FCX's 1.1% | |
| Quality / Margins | 10.3% margin vs NAK's -0.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 2.19 vs NAK's 2.42 | |
| Dividends | 0.9% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +67.6% vs NAK's +65.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.7% ROA vs NAK's -32.3%, ROIC 12.8% vs -68.7% |
NAK vs FCX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NAK vs FCX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FCX leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FCX and NAK operate at a comparable scale, with $26.4B and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $26.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$22M | $9.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$40M | $2.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$23M | $6.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +27.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +27.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +10.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +23.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +12.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +146.8% | +154.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — NAK and FCX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.1B | $98.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $106.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -15.01x | 45.01x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 25.71x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.50x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 12.48x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 3.82x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 88.49x | 3.21x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 88.10x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FCX leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FCX delivers a 8.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $-99 for NAK. NAK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.18x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FCX's 0.37x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FCX scores 5/9 vs NAK's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -98.8% | +8.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -32.3% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -68.7% | +12.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -40.1% | +12.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.18x | 0.37x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$52M | $8.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $55M | $3.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3M | $11.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -74.40x | 17.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — NAK and FCX each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NAK five years ago would be worth $37,004 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $18,050 for FCX. Over the past 12 months, FCX leads with a +67.6% total return vs NAK's +65.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NAK at 110.7% vs FCX's 22.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +4.6% | +32.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +65.9% | +67.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +834.9% | +85.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +270.0% | +80.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +514.1% | +589.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +110.7% | +22.9% |
Risk & Volatility
FCX leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FCX is the less volatile stock with a 2.19 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NAK's 2.42 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FCX currently trades 94.9% from its 52-week high vs NAK's 68.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.42x | 2.19x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.98 | $72.09 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.73 | $35.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +68.5% | +94.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 45.4 | 53.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 7.9M | 12.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates NAK as "Buy" and FCX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 4.4% upside for FCX (target: $71) vs -36.3% for NAK (target: $1). FCX is the only dividend payer here at 0.88% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $1.30 | $71.44 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.60 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% |
FCX leads in 3 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 2 categories are tied.
NAK vs FCX: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NAK or FCX a better buy right now?
Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) offers the better valuation at 45. 0x trailing P/E (25. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (NAK) a "Buy" — based on 5 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 is the better long-term investment — NAK or FCX?
Over the past 5 years, Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
(NAK) delivered a total return of +270. 0%, compared to +80. 5% for Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FCX returned +589. 8% versus NAK's +514. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — NAK or FCX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) is the lower-risk stock at 2. 19β versus Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. 's 2. 42β — meaning NAK is approximately 11% more volatile than FCX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (NAK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 18% versus 37% for Freeport-McMoRan Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — NAK or FCX?
On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
grew EPS 16. 9% year-over-year, compared to -182. 7% for Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — NAK or FCX?
Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 6% net margin versus 0. 0% for Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. — meaning it keeps 8. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FCX leads at 24. 4% versus 0. 0% for NAK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FCX leads at 27. 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.
06Is NAK or FCX more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FCX: 4.
4% to $71. 44.
07Which pays a better dividend — NAK or FCX?
In this comparison, FCX (0.
9% yield) pays a dividend. NAK does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is NAK or FCX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (0. 9% yield, +589. 8% 10Y return). Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (NAK) carries a higher beta of 2. 42 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FCX: +589. 8%, NAK: +514. 1%), 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.
09What are the main differences between NAK and FCX?
Both stocks operate in the Basic Materials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
FCX pays a dividend while NAK 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.