GPK vs NEM

For growth investors, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the stronger pick with 19.

1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 2% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK). Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK) offers the better valuation at 7. 2x trailing P/E (12. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK) a "Buy" — based on 27 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, Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK) is the cheapest at 7.

2x versus Newmont Corporation at 18. 2x. On forward P/E, Newmont Corporation is actually cheaper at 11. 2x — 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: Graphic Packaging Holding Company wins at 0. 63x versus Newmont Corporation's 0. 87x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Newmont Corporation (NEM) delivered a total return of +81.

7%, compared to -35. 4% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NEM returned +302. 6% versus GPK's +9. 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), Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

86β versus Graphic Packaging Holding Company's 0. 95β — meaning GPK is approximately 10% more volatile than NEM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Newmont Corporation (NEM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 167% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Newmont Corporation (NEM) is pulling ahead at 19.

1% versus -2. 2% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Newmont Corporation grew EPS 124. 1% year-over-year, compared to -31. 5% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company. Over a 3-year CAGR, NEM leads at 22. 7% 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.

Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the more profitable company, earning 32.

1% net margin versus 5. 2% for Graphic Packaging Holding Company — meaning it keeps 32. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NEM leads at 46. 9% versus 10. 1% for GPK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NEM leads at 49. 8%, 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, Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 63x versus Newmont Corporation's 0. 87x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Newmont Corporation (NEM) trades at 11. 2x forward P/E versus 12. 5x for Graphic Packaging Holding Company — 1. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NEM: 18. 0% to $137. 50.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Graphic Packaging Holding Company (GPK) offers the highest yield at 4. 1%, versus 0. 9% for Newmont Corporation (NEM).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

86), 0. 9% yield, +302. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NEM: +302. 6%, GPK: +9. 6%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (GPK (Consumer Cyclical) and NEM (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: GPK is a small-cap deep-value stock; NEM 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.