Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BGM vs CDE vs HL vs EXK vs PAAS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gold
Gold
Other Precious Metals
Silver
BGM vs CDE vs HL vs EXK vs PAAS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Gold | Gold | Other Precious Metals | Silver |
| Market Cap | $2M | $12.09B | $12.48B | $2.95B | $24.92B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $25M | $2.57B | $1.57B | $330M | $4.02B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1M | $799M | $559M | $-94M | $1.27B |
| Gross Margin | 16.4% | 35.4% | 50.9% | 9.3% | 43.8% |
| Operating Margin | -2.2% | 39.4% | 44.1% | -1.7% | 37.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 9.4x | 20.7x | 14.2x | 12.1x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $365M | $299M | $120M | $935M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10M | $554M | $242M | $106M | $1.21B |
BGM vs CDE vs HL vs EXK vs PAAS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BGM Group Ltd. (BGM) | 100 | 4.4 | -95.6% |
| Coeur Mining, Inc. (CDE) | 100 | 302.3 | +202.3% |
| Hecla Mining Company (HL) | 100 | 313.8 | +213.8% |
| Endeavour Silver Co… (EXK) | 100 | 327.9 | +227.9% |
| Pan American Silver… (PAAS) | 100 | 292.6 | +192.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BGM vs CDE vs HL vs EXK vs PAAS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BGM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.61, current ratio 3.39x
- Beta 0.61 vs CDE's 1.89
CDE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Rev growth 96.4%, EPS growth 5.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 38.1%
- PEG 0.18 vs PAAS's 0.48
- 96.4% revenue growth vs BGM's -46.0%
- Lower P/E (9.4x vs 12.1x), PEG 0.18 vs 0.48
HL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 373.7% 10Y total return vs PAAS's 335.4%
- 35.6% margin vs EXK's -28.4%
- +278.6% vs BGM's -97.3%
- 16.3% ROA vs EXK's -9.2%, ROIC 15.3% vs 1.5%
Among these 5 stocks, EXK doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PAAS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.88, yield 0.8%
- Beta 0.88, yield 0.8%, current ratio 2.69x
- 0.8% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs HL's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 96.4% revenue growth vs BGM's -46.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.4x vs 12.1x), PEG 0.18 vs 0.48 | |
| Quality / Margins | 35.6% margin vs EXK's -28.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.61 vs CDE's 1.89 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs HL's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +278.6% vs BGM's -97.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.3% ROA vs EXK's -9.2%, ROIC 15.3% vs 1.5% |
BGM vs CDE vs HL vs EXK vs PAAS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
BGM vs CDE vs HL vs EXK vs PAAS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HL leads in 2 of 6 categories
CDE leads 1 • PAAS leads 1 • BGM leads 0 • EXK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PAAS is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.0B annually — 160.1x BGM's $25M. HL is the more profitable business, keeping 35.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to EXK's -28.4%. On growth, EXK holds the edge at +154.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $25M | $2.6B | $1.6B | $330M | $4.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | $1.2B | $853M | $49M | $2.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | $799M | $559M | -$94M | $1.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $915M | $472M | -$129M | $1.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +16.4% | +35.4% | +50.9% | +9.3% | +43.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.2% | +39.4% | +44.1% | -1.7% | +37.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.7% | +31.1% | +35.6% | -28.4% | +31.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -13.5% | +35.6% | +30.0% | -39.1% | +34.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +137.8% | +57.4% | +154.0% | +49.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +4.9% | -160.0% | -97.5% | +134.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — BGM and CDE each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.6x trailing earnings, CDE trades at a 46% valuation discount to HL's 38.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CDE offers better value at 0.39x vs PAAS's 0.90x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2M | $12.1B | $12.5B | $3.0B | $24.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$8M | $11.9B | $12.5B | $3.0B | $24.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.52x | 20.62x | 37.98x | -77.19x | 22.66x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 9.37x | 20.75x | 14.18x | 12.06x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.39x | — | — | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | -11.30x | 11.63x | 17.75x | 75.17x | 14.32x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.09x | 5.84x | 8.77x | 13.56x | 6.77x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.05x | 3.65x | 4.71x | 5.02x | 3.23x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 18.15x | 40.23x | — | 23.04x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CDE leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HL delivers a 22.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $23 in annual profit, vs $-18 for EXK. CDE carries lower financial leverage with a 0.11x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EXK's 0.25x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HL scores 8/9 vs EXK's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.3% | +15.2% | +22.5% | -18.4% | +19.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.8% | +11.2% | +16.3% | -9.2% | +14.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.2% | +23.5% | +15.3% | +1.5% | +15.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -1.3% | +23.9% | +16.8% | +1.6% | +15.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.11x | 0.12x | 0.25x | 0.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$10M | -$188M | $57M | $14M | -$277M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10M | $554M | $242M | $106M | $1.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $365M | $299M | $120M | $935M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.88x | 47.33x | 19.04x | -39.17x | 23.79x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HL five years ago would be worth $26,180 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,009 for BGM. Over the past 12 months, HL leads with a +278.6% total return vs BGM's -97.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CDE at 74.1% vs BGM's -61.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -91.5% | +5.8% | -1.4% | +11.3% | +16.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -97.3% | +166.3% | +278.6% | +198.7% | +133.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -94.5% | +427.3% | +203.4% | +141.2% | +237.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -89.9% | +104.0% | +161.8% | +67.0% | +77.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -89.9% | +156.0% | +373.7% | +179.5% | +335.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -61.9% | +74.1% | +44.8% | +34.1% | +50.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BGM and PAAS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BGM is the less volatile stock with a 0.61 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CDE's 1.89 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PAAS currently trades 84.5% from its 52-week high vs BGM's 1.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.61x | 1.89x | 1.51x | 1.80x | 0.88x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $17.17 | $27.77 | $34.17 | $15.15 | $69.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.27 | $6.20 | $4.68 | $3.14 | $22.08 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +1.8% | +66.8% | +54.5% | +66.2% | +84.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 30.6 | 46.0 | 46.2 | 56.2 | 57.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 282K | 22.1M | 15.2M | 9.3M | 6.2M |
Analyst Outlook
PAAS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CDE as "Buy", HL as "Hold", EXK as "Buy", PAAS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 46.6% upside for CDE (target: $27) vs 19.3% for HL (target: $22). PAAS is the only dividend payer here at 0.79% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $27.20 | $22.21 | $12.75 | $75.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 21 | 26 | 14 | 24 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.1% | — | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.01 | — | $0.47 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% | +0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
HL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). CDE leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
BGM vs CDE vs HL vs EXK vs PAAS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Coeur Mining, Inc.
(CDE) is the stronger pick with 96. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -46. 0% for BGM Group Ltd. (BGM). Coeur Mining, Inc. (CDE) offers the better valuation at 20. 6x trailing P/E (9. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Coeur Mining, Inc. (CDE) a "Buy" — based on 21 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 — BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS?
On trailing P/E, Coeur Mining, Inc.
(CDE) is the cheapest at 20. 6x versus Hecla Mining Company at 38. 0x. On forward P/E, Coeur Mining, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Coeur Mining, Inc. wins at 0. 18x versus Pan American Silver Corp. 's 0. 48x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS?
Over the past 5 years, Hecla Mining Company (HL) delivered a total return of +161.
8%, compared to -89. 9% for BGM Group Ltd. (BGM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HL returned +373. 7% versus BGM's -89. 9%. 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 — BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), BGM Group Ltd.
(BGM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 61β versus Coeur Mining, Inc. 's 1. 89β — meaning CDE is approximately 212% more volatile than BGM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Coeur Mining, Inc. (CDE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 11% versus 25% for Endeavour Silver Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Coeur Mining, Inc.
(CDE) is pulling ahead at 96. 4% versus -46. 0% for BGM Group Ltd. (BGM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hecla Mining Company grew EPS 765. 7% year-over-year, compared to -519. 4% for Endeavour Silver Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CDE leads at 38. 1% 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 — BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS?
Coeur Mining, Inc.
(CDE) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 3% net margin versus -14. 5% for Endeavour Silver Corp. — meaning it keeps 28. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HL leads at 37. 5% versus -2. 2% for BGM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HL leads at 41. 1%, 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 BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS 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, Coeur Mining, Inc. (CDE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 18x versus Pan American Silver Corp. 's 0. 48x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Coeur Mining, Inc. (CDE) trades at 9. 4x forward P/E versus 20. 7x for Hecla Mining Company — 11. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CDE: 46. 6% to $27. 20.
08Which pays a better dividend — BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS?
In this comparison, PAAS (0.
8% yield) pays a dividend. BGM, CDE, HL, EXK do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BGM or CDE or HL or EXK or PAAS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Pan American Silver Corp.
(PAAS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 88), 0. 8% yield, +335. 4% 10Y return). Coeur Mining, Inc. (CDE) carries a higher beta of 1. 89 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PAAS: +335. 4%, CDE: +156. 0%), 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 BGM and CDE and HL and EXK and PAAS?
These companies operate in different sectors (BGM (Healthcare) and CDE (Basic Materials) and HL (Basic Materials) and EXK (Basic Materials) and PAAS (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: BGM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CDE is a mid-cap high-growth stock; HL is a mid-cap high-growth stock; EXK is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PAAS is a mid-cap high-growth stock. PAAS pays a dividend while BGM, CDE, HL, EXK do 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.