FNV vs WPM

For growth investors, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.

(WPM) is the stronger pick with 83. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 66. 4% for Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV). Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM) offers the better valuation at 38. 1x trailing P/E (23. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM) a "Buy" — based on 20 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, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.

(WPM) is the cheapest at 38. 1x versus Franco-Nevada Corporation at 38. 4x. On forward P/E, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. is actually cheaper at 23. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Franco-Nevada Corporation wins at 0. 98x versus Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. 's 1. 02x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.

(WPM) delivered a total return of +203. 0%, compared to +61. 2% for Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WPM returned +585. 5% versus FNV's +248. 0%. 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), Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

56β versus Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. 's 0. 63β — meaning WPM is approximately 12% more volatile than FNV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 0% for Franco-Nevada Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.

(WPM) is pulling ahead at 83. 3% versus 66. 4% for Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. grew EPS 181. 2% year-over-year, compared to 104. 2% for Franco-Nevada Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, WPM leads at 30. 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.

Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.

(WPM) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 6% net margin versus 61. 1% for Franco-Nevada Corporation — meaning it keeps 63. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FNV leads at 71. 0% versus 68. 8% for WPM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FNV leads at 73. 9%, 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.

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. 98x versus Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. 's 1. 02x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM) trades at 23. 1x forward P/E versus 26. 0x for Franco-Nevada Corporation — 3. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FNV: 22. 3% to $275. 20.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Franco-Nevada Corporation (FNV) offers the highest yield at 0. 6%, versus 0. 5% for Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.

(WPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 63), 0. 5% yield, +585. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WPM: +585. 5%, FNV: +248. 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.

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.