IAG vs KGC

For growth investors, IAMGOLD Corporation (IAG) is the stronger pick with 77.

8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 39. 3% for Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC). Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) offers the better valuation at 15. 3x trailing P/E (9. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate IAMGOLD Corporation (IAG) a "Buy" — based on 29 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, Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) is the cheapest at 15.

3x versus IAMGOLD Corporation at 15. 8x. On forward P/E, IAMGOLD Corporation is actually cheaper at 7. 7x — 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: IAMGOLD Corporation wins at 0. 12x versus Kinross Gold Corporation's 0. 78x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, IAMGOLD Corporation (IAG) delivered a total return of +454.

1%, compared to +301. 4% for Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KGC returned +499. 1% versus IAG's +439. 4%. 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), Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

69β versus IAMGOLD Corporation's 0. 93β — meaning IAG is approximately 36% more volatile than KGC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 20% for IAMGOLD Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), IAMGOLD Corporation (IAG) is pulling ahead at 77.

8% versus 39. 3% for Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Kinross Gold Corporation grew EPS 158. 4% year-over-year, compared to -22. 7% for IAMGOLD Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, IAG leads at 44. 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.

Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) is the more profitable company, earning 33.

9% net margin versus 23. 3% for IAMGOLD Corporation — meaning it keeps 33. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KGC leads at 43. 2% versus 38. 9% for IAG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KGC leads at 47. 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.

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, IAMGOLD Corporation (IAG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 12x versus Kinross Gold Corporation's 0. 78x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, IAMGOLD Corporation (IAG) trades at 7. 7x forward P/E versus 9. 7x for Kinross Gold Corporation — 2. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IAG: 60. 9% to $29. 50.

In this comparison, KGC (0.

4% yield) pays a dividend. IAG does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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

69), +499. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KGC: +499. 1%, IAG: +439. 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.

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.