Financial - Capital Markets
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BGC vs GFI vs NEM vs MKTX vs AEM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gold
Gold
Financial - Capital Markets
Gold
BGC vs GFI vs NEM vs MKTX vs AEM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Capital Markets | Gold | Gold | Financial - Capital Markets | Gold |
| Market Cap | $5.38B | $40.19B | $125.72B | $5.43B | $94.03B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3.01B | $10.92B | $17.23B | $849M | $11.87B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $155M | $2.54B | $5.26B | $310M | $4.45B |
| Gross Margin | 89.5% | 43.1% | 52.1% | 69.9% | 57.3% |
| Operating Margin | 10.5% | 43.2% | 49.3% | 41.2% | 52.9% |
| Forward P/E | 7.9x | 7.6x | 10.9x | 18.6x | 13.5x |
| Total Debt | $1.80B | $2.95B | $474M | $285M | $321M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $874M | $860M | $7.65B | $520M | $2.87B |
BGC vs GFI vs NEM vs MKTX vs AEM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BGC Group, Inc (BGC) | 100 | 437.6 | +337.6% |
| Gold Fields Limited (GFI) | 100 | 581.6 | +481.6% |
| Newmont Corporation (NEM) | 100 | 194.1 | +94.1% |
| MarketAxess Holding… (MKTX) | 100 | 30.0 | -70.0% |
| Agnico Eagle Mines … (AEM) | 100 | 293.3 | +193.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BGC vs GFI vs NEM vs MKTX vs AEM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, BGC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
GFI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- 10.9% 10Y total return vs AEM's 351.2%
- PEG 0.16 vs MKTX's 3.03
- Lower P/E (7.6x vs 13.5x), PEG 0.16 vs 0.40
- 23.4% ROA vs BGC's 3.1%, ROIC 24.0% vs 8.6%
NEM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +112.0% vs MKTX's -31.7%
MKTX is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta -0.28, yield 2.0%
- 2.0% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs GFI's 0.9%
AEM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 43.7%, EPS growth 134.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 29.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.52, Low D/E 1.3%, current ratio 2.02x
- Beta 0.52, yield 0.8%, current ratio 2.02x
- 43.7% revenue growth vs MKTX's 3.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 43.7% revenue growth vs MKTX's 3.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.6x vs 13.5x), PEG 0.16 vs 0.40 | |
| Quality / Margins | 37.5% margin vs BGC's 5.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.52 vs GFI's 0.86, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.0% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs GFI's 0.9% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +112.0% vs MKTX's -31.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 23.4% ROA vs BGC's 3.1%, ROIC 24.0% vs 8.6% |
BGC vs GFI vs NEM vs MKTX vs AEM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BGC vs GFI vs NEM vs MKTX vs AEM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AEM leads in 1 of 6 categories
NEM leads 1 • MKTX leads 1 • BGC leads 0 • GFI leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AEM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NEM is the larger business by revenue, generating $17.2B annually — 20.3x MKTX's $849M. AEM is the more profitable business, keeping 37.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BGC's 5.2%. On growth, AEM holds the edge at +64.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.0B | $10.9B | $17.2B | $849M | $11.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $456M | $6.0B | $12.7B | $443M | $7.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $155M | $2.5B | $5.3B | $310M | $4.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $307M | $2.0B | $12.9B | $236M | $4.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +89.5% | +43.1% | +52.1% | +69.9% | +57.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.5% | +43.2% | +49.3% | +41.2% | +52.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.2% | +23.2% | +30.5% | +29.0% | +37.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.9% | +18.7% | +75.0% | +44.0% | +37.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +64.2% | -100.0% | — | +64.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -40.0% | +165.1% | -100.0% | +4.5% | +199.0% |
Valuation Metrics
NEM leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.7x trailing earnings, NEM trades at a 51% valuation discount to BGC's 36.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AEM offers better value at 0.63x vs MKTX's 3.03x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.4B | $40.2B | $125.7B | $5.4B | $94.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.3B | $42.3B | $118.6B | $5.2B | $91.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 36.42x | 32.54x | 17.70x | 22.92x | 21.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.92x | 7.64x | 10.89x | 18.63x | 13.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.20x | 0.67x | 1.38x | 3.03x | 0.63x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.02x | 15.54x | 9.03x | 11.96x | 11.47x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.79x | 7.73x | 5.69x | 6.39x | 7.90x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.74x | 7.49x | 3.69x | 4.85x | 3.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 20.08x | 56.66x | 17.22x | 14.51x | 22.06x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — GFI and NEM each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GFI delivers a 40.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $14 for BGC. AEM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BGC's 1.57x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NEM scores 9/9 vs MKTX's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.7% | +40.6% | +15.6% | +24.0% | +19.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.1% | +23.4% | +9.4% | +15.3% | +13.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.6% | +24.0% | +24.9% | +18.1% | +21.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.0% | +27.6% | +20.7% | +25.4% | +20.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 5 | 9 | 5 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.57x | 0.55x | 0.01x | 0.25x | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $922M | $2.1B | -$7.2B | -$235M | -$2.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $874M | $860M | $7.6B | $520M | $2.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.8B | $2.9B | $474M | $285M | $321M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.71x | 44.58x | 50.54x | 168.60x | 73.32x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — GFI and AEM each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GFI five years ago would be worth $46,194 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,822 for MKTX. Over the past 12 months, NEM leads with a +112.0% total return vs MKTX's -31.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AEM at 48.0% vs MKTX's -18.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +26.5% | +6.4% | +12.4% | -14.1% | +10.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +22.1% | +103.5% | +112.0% | -31.7% | +61.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +176.9% | +183.6% | +142.1% | -46.0% | +224.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +109.2% | +361.9% | +80.0% | -61.8% | +183.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +130.1% | +1086.7% | +293.1% | +38.3% | +351.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +40.4% | +41.6% | +34.3% | -18.6% | +48.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BGC and MKTX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MKTX is the less volatile stock with a -0.28 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GFI's 0.86 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BGC currently trades 94.8% from its 52-week high vs MKTX's 65.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.78x | 0.86x | 0.75x | -0.28x | 0.52x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.90 | $61.64 | $134.88 | $232.84 | $255.24 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $8.27 | $19.35 | $48.27 | $146.00 | $103.38 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.8% | +72.8% | +84.1% | +65.6% | +73.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.6 | 52.5 | 53.5 | 26.8 | 43.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.4M | 3.1M | 9.2M | 456K | 2.5M |
Analyst Outlook
MKTX leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BGC as "Buy", GFI as "Hold", NEM as "Buy", MKTX as "Hold", AEM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 28.1% upside for MKTX (target: $196) vs 1.9% for BGC (target: $12). For income investors, MKTX offers the higher dividend yield at 2.05% vs BGC's 0.72%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $11.50 | $54.42 | $137.50 | $195.60 | $237.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 18 | 36 | 23 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.7% | +0.9% | +0.9% | +2.0% | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.08 | $0.39 | $1.00 | $3.13 | $1.45 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.2% | 0.0% | +1.8% | +7.7% | +0.7% |
AEM leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). NEM leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
BGC vs GFI vs NEM vs MKTX vs AEM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the stronger pick with 43.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 8% for MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX). Newmont Corporation (NEM) offers the better valuation at 17. 7x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate BGC Group, Inc (BGC) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM?
On trailing P/E, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the cheapest at 17.
7x versus BGC Group, Inc at 36. 4x. On forward P/E, Gold Fields Limited is actually cheaper at 7. 6x — 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: Gold Fields Limited wins at 0. 16x versus MarketAxess Holdings Inc. 's 3. 03x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM?
Over the past 5 years, Gold Fields Limited (GFI) delivered a total return of +361.
9%, compared to -61. 8% for MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GFI returned +1087% versus MKTX's +38. 3%. 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 — BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MarketAxess Holdings Inc.
(MKTX) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 28β versus Gold Fields Limited's 0. 86β — meaning GFI is approximately -405% more volatile than MKTX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 157% for BGC Group, Inc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is pulling ahead at 43.
7% versus 3. 8% for MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Agnico Eagle Mines Limited grew EPS 134. 4% year-over-year, compared to -8. 5% for MarketAxess Holdings Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AEM leads at 29. 3% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM?
Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the more profitable company, earning 37.
5% net margin versus 5. 2% for BGC Group, Inc — meaning it keeps 37. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AEM leads at 53. 1% versus 10. 5% for BGC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BGC leads at 89. 5%, 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 BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM 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, Gold Fields Limited (GFI) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 16x versus MarketAxess Holdings Inc. 's 3. 03x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Gold Fields Limited (GFI) trades at 7. 6x forward P/E versus 18. 6x for MarketAxess Holdings Inc. — 11. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MKTX: 28. 1% to $195. 60.
08Which pays a better dividend — BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX) offers the highest yield at 2. 0%, versus 0. 7% for BGC Group, Inc (BGC).
09Is BGC or GFI or NEM or MKTX or AEM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, MarketAxess Holdings Inc.
(MKTX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 28), 2. 0% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MKTX: +38. 3%, BGC: +130. 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.
10What are the main differences between BGC and GFI and NEM and MKTX and AEM?
These companies operate in different sectors (BGC (Financial Services) and GFI (Basic Materials) and NEM (Basic Materials) and MKTX (Financial Services) and AEM (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: BGC is a small-cap high-growth stock; GFI is a mid-cap high-growth stock; NEM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; MKTX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AEM is a mid-cap high-growth stock. 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.