Asset Management
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
ASA vs FNV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gold
ASA vs FNV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Asset Management | Gold |
| Market Cap | $1.27B | $43.96B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $119M | $1.83B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $264M | $1.12B |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | 73.9% |
| Operating Margin | 96.9% | 74.2% |
| Forward P/E | 1715.1x | 26.5x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $9M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $433M |
ASA vs FNV — 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 | 451.8 | +351.8% |
| Franco-Nevada Corpo… (FNV) | 100 | 165.1 | +65.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ASA vs FNV
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%
- 451.6% 10Y total return vs FNV's 256.1%
- 9.5% NII/revenue growth vs FNV's 66.4%
FNV is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.56, yield 0.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.56, Low D/E 0.1%, current ratio 8.30x
- Beta 0.56, yield 0.6%, current ratio 8.30x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.5% NII/revenue growth vs FNV's 66.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (26.5x vs 1715.1x), PEG 0.99 vs 340.56 | |
| Quality / Margins | 96.9% margin vs FNV's 61.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.56 vs ASA's 0.87 | |
| Dividends | 0.6% yield; 11-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +121.7% vs FNV's +34.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 39.6% ROA vs FNV's 15.2%, ROIC 22.2% vs 16.8% |
ASA vs FNV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ASA vs FNV — 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 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FNV is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.8B annually — 15.4x ASA's $119M. ASA is the more profitable business, keeping 96.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FNV's 61.1%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $119M | $1.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$3M | $1.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $264M | $1.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | -$695M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +100.0% | +73.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +96.9% | +74.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +96.9% | +61.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -38.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +88.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +47.0% | +113.2% |
Valuation Metrics
ASA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.1x trailing earnings, ASA trades at a 71% valuation discount to FNV's 38.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FNV offers better value at 1.46x vs ASA's 2.21x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.3B | $44.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.3B | $43.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 11.13x | 38.92x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1715.14x | 26.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.21x | 1.46x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.80x | 26.74x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.65x | 23.72x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.92x | 5.78x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
ASA leads this category, winning 5 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 FNV. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FNV scores 7/9 vs ASA's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +39.8% | +16.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +39.6% | +15.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +22.2% | +16.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +29.5% | +18.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.00x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | -$425M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $433M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $9M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -56.37x | 450.58x |
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 $29,669 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $15,891 for FNV. Over the past 12 months, ASA leads with a +121.7% total return vs FNV's +34.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ASA at 57.0% vs FNV's 13.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +15.9% | +9.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +121.7% | +34.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +286.9% | +45.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +196.7% | +58.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +451.6% | +256.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +57.0% | +13.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ASA and FNV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FNV is the less volatile stock with a 0.56 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.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.99x | 0.66x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $83.20 | $285.67 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $28.04 | $152.89 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +81.1% | +79.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.3 | 43.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 65K | 786K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
FNV is the only dividend payer here at 0.64% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $275.20 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 25 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.45 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ASA leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics. 1 category is tied.
ASA vs FNV: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ASA or FNV 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 66. 4% for Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV). ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) offers the better valuation at 11. 1x trailing P/E (1715. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) a "Hold" — based on 25 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 FNV?
On trailing P/E, ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is the cheapest at 11.
1x versus Franco-Nevada Corporation at 38. 9x. On forward P/E, Franco-Nevada Corporation is actually cheaper at 26. 5x — 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: Franco-Nevada Corporation wins at 0. 99x versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 340. 56x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ASA or FNV?
Over the past 5 years, ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) delivered a total return of +196.
7%, compared to +58. 9% for Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ASA returned +465. 3% versus FNV's +262. 2%. 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 FNV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
66β versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 0. 99β — meaning ASA is approximately 50% more volatile than FNV relative to the S&P 500.
05Which is growing faster — ASA or FNV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is pulling ahead at 947.
2% versus 66. 4% for Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited grew EPS 1112% year-over-year, compared to 104. 2% for Franco-Nevada 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 FNV?
ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited (ASA) is the more profitable company, earning 96.
9% net margin versus 61. 1% for Franco-Nevada 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 71. 0% for FNV. 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 FNV 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, Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 99x versus ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited's 340. 56x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) trades at 26. 5x forward P/E versus 1715. 1x for ASA Gold and Precious Metals Limited — 1688. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — ASA or FNV?
In this comparison, FNV (0.
6% yield) pays a dividend. ASA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ASA or FNV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
66), 0. 6% yield, +262. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FNV: +262. 2%, ASA: +465. 3%), 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 FNV?
These companies operate in different sectors (ASA (Financial Services) and FNV (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
FNV 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 FNV vs WPM
WPM is one of the most direct listed alternatives to FNV.
Compare ASA vs NEM
NEM overlaps with ASA in an adjacent operating segment worth comparing.
Expand With WPM + RGLD
WPM and RGLD are the strongest missing peers across the current compare set.