Other Precious Metals
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
FSM vs HL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gold
FSM vs HL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Other Precious Metals | Gold |
| Market Cap | $3.18B | $12.13B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.04B | $1.57B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $289M | $559M |
| Gross Margin | 48.1% | 50.9% |
| Operating Margin | 43.3% | 44.1% |
| Forward P/E | 7.1x | 19.1x |
| Total Debt | $266M | $299M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $553M | $242M |
FSM vs HL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fortuna Mining Corp. (FSM) | 100 | 232.5 | +132.5% |
| Hecla Mining Company (HL) | 100 | 544.8 | +444.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FSM vs HL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FSM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.15
- Lower volatility, beta 1.15, Low D/E 15.4%, current ratio 2.98x
- Beta 1.15, current ratio 2.98x
HL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 53.0%, EPS growth 7.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 25.6%
- 360.6% 10Y total return vs FSM's 73.4%
- 53.0% revenue growth vs FSM's -9.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 53.0% revenue growth vs FSM's -9.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.1x vs 19.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 35.6% margin vs FSM's 27.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.15 vs HL's 1.26 | |
| Dividends | 0.1% yield; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +271.0% vs FSM's +69.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.3% ROA vs FSM's 12.9%, ROIC 15.3% vs 19.3% |
FSM vs HL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FSM vs HL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HL leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HL is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.6B annually — 1.5x FSM's $1.0B. HL is the more profitable business, keeping 35.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FSM's 27.6%. On growth, HL holds the edge at +57.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.0B | $1.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $661M | $853M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $289M | $559M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $289M | $472M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +48.1% | +50.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +43.3% | +44.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +27.6% | +35.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +27.7% | +30.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -10.0% | +57.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.3% | -160.0% |
Valuation Metrics
FSM leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.6x trailing earnings, FSM trades at a 69% valuation discount to HL's 36.9x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, FSM's 5.1x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HL's 17.3x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.2B | $12.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.9B | $12.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 11.60x | 36.92x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.11x | 19.07x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.23x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 5.11x | 17.25x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.31x | 8.53x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.02x | 4.58x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 10.80x | 39.11x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FSM leads this category, winning 5 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 FSM. HL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.12x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FSM's 0.15x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HL scores 8/9 vs FSM's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +17.8% | +22.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +12.9% | +16.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +19.3% | +15.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +18.4% | +16.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.15x | 0.12x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$286M | $57M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $553M | $242M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $266M | $299M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 19.95x | 19.04x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HL leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HL five years ago would be worth $25,033 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16,186 for FSM. Over the past 12 months, HL leads with a +271.0% total return vs FSM's +69.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HL at 43.4% vs FSM's 39.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +9.4% | -4.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +69.5% | +271.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +168.4% | +194.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +61.9% | +150.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +73.4% | +360.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +39.0% | +43.4% |
Risk & Volatility
FSM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FSM is the less volatile stock with a 1.15 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HL's 1.26 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FSM currently trades 75.4% from its 52-week high vs HL's 52.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.15x | 1.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $13.85 | $34.17 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.23 | $4.68 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.4% | +52.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.7 | 46.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 6.3M | 15.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates FSM as "Buy" and HL as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 34.1% upside for FSM (target: $14) vs 31.7% for HL (target: $24).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.00 | $23.83 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 6 | 26 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.01 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | +0.0% |
FSM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). HL leads in 2 (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns).
FSM vs HL: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FSM or HL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Hecla Mining Company (HL) is the stronger pick with 53.
0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 6% for Fortuna Mining Corp. (FSM). Fortuna Mining Corp. (FSM) offers the better valuation at 11. 6x trailing P/E (7. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fortuna Mining Corp. (FSM) a "Buy" — based on 6 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 — FSM or HL?
On trailing P/E, Fortuna Mining Corp.
(FSM) is the cheapest at 11. 6x versus Hecla Mining Company at 36. 9x. On forward P/E, Fortuna Mining Corp. is actually cheaper at 7. 1x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FSM or HL?
Over the past 5 years, Hecla Mining Company (HL) delivered a total return of +150.
3%, compared to +61. 9% for Fortuna Mining Corp. (FSM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HL returned +360. 6% versus FSM's +73. 4%. 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 — FSM or HL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fortuna Mining Corp.
(FSM) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 15β versus Hecla Mining Company's 1. 26β — meaning HL is approximately 10% more volatile than FSM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Hecla Mining Company (HL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 12% versus 15% for Fortuna Mining Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FSM or HL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Hecla Mining Company (HL) is pulling ahead at 53.
0% versus -9. 6% for Fortuna Mining Corp. (FSM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hecla Mining Company grew EPS 765. 7% year-over-year, compared to 119. 5% for Fortuna Mining Corp.. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — FSM or HL?
Fortuna Mining Corp.
(FSM) is the more profitable company, earning 31. 5% net margin versus 22. 6% for Hecla Mining Company — meaning it keeps 31. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FSM leads at 38. 5% versus 37. 5% for HL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FSM leads at 48. 7%, 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 FSM or HL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Fortuna Mining Corp.
(FSM) trades at 7. 1x forward P/E versus 19. 1x for Hecla Mining Company — 12. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FSM: 34. 1% to $14. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — FSM or HL?
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.
09Is FSM or HL better for a retirement portfolio?
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). Both have compounded well over 10 years (HL: +360. 6%, FSM: +73. 4%), 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 FSM and HL?
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.
In terms of investment character: FSM is a small-cap deep-value stock; HL 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.