ASM vs HL

For growth investors, Hecla Mining Company (HL) is the stronger pick with 53.

0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 30. 9% for Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. (ASM). Hecla Mining Company (HL) offers the better valuation at 36. 9x trailing P/E (19. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. (ASM) 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.

On trailing P/E, Hecla Mining Company (HL) is the cheapest at 36.

9x versus Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. at 40. 4x. On forward P/E, Hecla Mining Company is actually cheaper at 19. 1x.

Over the past 5 years, Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd.

(ASM) delivered a total return of +390. 0%, compared to +150. 3% for Hecla Mining Company (HL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ASM returned +435. 9% versus HL's +360. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Hecla Mining Company (HL) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

26β versus Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. 's 2. 05β — meaning ASM is approximately 63% more volatile than HL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. (ASM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 12% for Hecla Mining Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hecla Mining Company (HL) is pulling ahead at 53.

0% versus 30. 9% for Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. (ASM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hecla Mining Company grew EPS 765. 7% year-over-year, compared to 183. 3% for Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HL leads at 25. 6% annualised revenue growth. 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.

Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd.

(ASM) is the more profitable company, earning 31. 3% net margin versus 22. 6% for Hecla Mining Company — meaning it keeps 31. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HL leads at 37. 5% versus 33. 9% for ASM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ASM leads at 48. 3%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Hecla Mining Company (HL) trades at 19.

1x forward P/E versus 19. 2x for Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. — 0. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ASM: 57. 9% to $10. 83.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Hecla Mining Company (HL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.

26), +360. 6% 10Y return). Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. (ASM) carries a higher beta of 2. 05 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (HL: +360. 6%, ASM: +435. 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.

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.

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.