Industrial Materials
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
LZM vs SBSW vs JPM vs NEM vs MP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gold
Banks - Diversified
Gold
Industrial Materials
LZM vs SBSW vs JPM vs NEM vs MP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial Materials | Gold | Banks - Diversified | Gold | Industrial Materials |
| Market Cap | $353M | $6.98B | $896.00B | $111.05B | $10.25B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $238.26B | $280.33B | $17.23B | $348M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-60M | $-12.39B | $57.05B | $5.26B | $-71M |
| Gross Margin | -51.3% | 21.2% | 60.0% | 52.1% | 24.2% |
| Operating Margin | -55.8% | 18.9% | 25.9% | 49.3% | -39.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 0.2x | 14.4x | 9.7x | 247.8x |
| Total Debt | $58M | $44.34B | $942.38B | $474M | $1.04B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $17.16B | $343.34B | $7.65B | $1.17B |
LZM vs SBSW vs JPM vs NEM vs MP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lifezone Metals Lim… (LZM) | 100 | 39.7 | -60.3% |
| Sibanye Stillwater … (SBSW) | 100 | 78.6 | -21.4% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 202.5 | +102.5% |
| Newmont Corporation (NEM) | 100 | 161.6 | +61.6% |
| MP Materials Corp. (MP) | 100 | 126.7 | +26.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LZM vs SBSW vs JPM vs NEM vs MP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LZM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 6.5% revenue growth vs JPM's 3.3%
SBSW is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (0.2x vs 247.8x)
JPM has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
- Beta 0.94, yield 1.9%, current ratio 0.52x
- Beta 0.94 vs LZM's 2.57
- 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs SBSW's 0.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
NEM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Rev growth 19.1%, EPS growth 124.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 22.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.45, Low D/E 1.4%, current ratio 1.72x
- PEG 0.76 vs JPM's 0.81
- 30.5% margin vs LZM's -50.0%
MP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 475.5% 10Y total return vs JPM's 465.8%
- +97.1% vs LZM's -5.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.5% revenue growth vs JPM's 3.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.2x vs 247.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 30.5% margin vs LZM's -50.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.94 vs LZM's 2.57 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs SBSW's 0.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +97.1% vs LZM's -5.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.4% ROA vs LZM's -36.2%, ROIC 24.9% vs -13.1% |
LZM vs SBSW vs JPM vs NEM vs MP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LZM vs SBSW vs JPM vs NEM vs MP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NEM leads in 2 of 6 categories
JPM leads 2 • MP leads 1 • LZM leads 0 • SBSW leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NEM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 234085.8x LZM's $1M. NEM is the more profitable business, keeping 30.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LZM's -50.0%. On growth, LZM holds the edge at +7.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $238.3B | $280.3B | $17.2B | $348M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$64M | $63.5B | $81.4B | $12.7B | -$27M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$60M | -$12.4B | $57.0B | $5.3B | -$71M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$66M | -$9.5B | $100.9B | $12.9B | -$314M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -51.3% | +21.2% | +60.0% | +52.1% | +24.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -55.8% | +18.9% | +25.9% | +49.3% | -39.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -50.0% | -5.2% | +20.4% | +30.5% | -20.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -55.3% | -4.0% | +36.0% | +75.0% | -90.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.1% | +25.4% | — | -100.0% | +118.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +56.8% | -10.0% | +16.0% | -100.0% | +71.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — SBSW and JPM each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.6x trailing earnings, NEM trades at a 2% valuation discount to JPM's 16.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs NEM's 1.22x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $353M | $7.0B | $896.0B | $111.1B | $10.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $392M | $8.6B | $1.50T | $103.9B | $10.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -23.12x | -23.69x | 16.00x | 15.64x | -115.10x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 0.20x | 14.40x | 9.70x | 247.85x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.90x | 1.22x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 4.44x | 18.36x | 7.92x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 334.25x | 0.95x | 3.20x | 5.03x | 37.19x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.31x | 2.58x | 2.47x | 3.26x | 4.09x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 67.63x | 8.88x | 15.22x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
NEM leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $-61 for LZM. NEM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NEM scores 9/9 vs LZM's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -60.9% | -28.1% | +15.9% | +15.6% | -3.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -36.2% | -8.3% | +1.3% | +9.4% | -2.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -13.1% | +22.9% | +4.5% | +24.9% | -4.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.8% | +19.1% | +8.9% | +20.7% | -4.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.80x | 1.00x | 2.60x | 0.01x | 0.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $38M | $27.2B | $599.0B | -$7.2B | -$123M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $17.2B | $343.3B | $7.6B | $1.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $58M | $44.3B | $942.4B | $474M | $1.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -4.30x | 1.31x | 0.74x | 50.54x | -2.91x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MP leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,986 for LZM. Over the past 12 months, MP leads with a +97.1% total return vs LZM's -5.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MP at 38.3% vs LZM's -28.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.3% | -29.7% | -0.5% | -0.5% | +4.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -5.1% | +41.7% | +21.8% | +81.1% | +97.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -63.3% | +44.4% | +138.2% | +146.3% | +164.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.1% | -32.2% | +118.2% | +54.2% | +73.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.1% | +14.5% | +465.8% | +212.4% | +475.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -28.4% | +13.0% | +33.6% | +35.1% | +38.3% |
Risk & Volatility
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JPM is the less volatile stock with a 0.94 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LZM's 2.57 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 95.1% from its 52-week high vs SBSW's 46.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.57x | 2.28x | 0.94x | 1.45x | 1.91x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.40 | $21.29 | $337.25 | $134.88 | $100.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.07 | $6.72 | $262.71 | $54.14 | $25.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +61.4% | +46.3% | +95.1% | +74.3% | +57.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.8 | 34.8 | 59.1 | 38.3 | 43.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 757K | 4.5M | 7.0M | 6.7M | 6.0M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LZM as "Buy", SBSW as "Hold", JPM as "Buy", NEM as "Buy", MP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 117.0% upside for SBSW (target: $21) vs 5.9% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, JPM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.86% vs SBSW's 0.25%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $7.00 | $21.40 | $339.75 | $143.33 | $83.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 12 | 61 | 36 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.2% | +1.9% | +1.0% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 15 | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.40 | $5.95 | $1.00 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.9% | +2.1% | 0.0% |
NEM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). JPM leads in 2 (Risk & Volatility, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
LZM vs SBSW vs JPM vs NEM vs MP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) is the stronger pick with 652.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). Newmont Corporation (NEM) offers the better valuation at 15. 6x trailing P/E (9. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP?
On trailing P/E, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the cheapest at 15.
6x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. at 16. 0x. On forward P/E, Sibanye Stillwater Limited is actually cheaper at 0. 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: Newmont Corporation wins at 0. 76x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. 's 0. 81x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -60. 1% for Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MP returned +475. 5% versus LZM's -60. 1%. 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 — LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 94β versus Lifezone Metals Limited's 2. 57β — meaning LZM is approximately 173% more volatile than JPM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Newmont Corporation (NEM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) is pulling ahead at 652.
2% versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Newmont Corporation grew EPS 124. 1% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for JPMorgan Chase & Co.. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP?
Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the more profitable company, earning 32.
1% net margin versus -1289. 2% for Lifezone Metals Limited — 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 -1724. 9% for LZM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JPM leads at 59. 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.
07Is LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP 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, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 76x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. 's 0. 81x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Sibanye Stillwater Limited (SBSW) trades at 0. 2x forward P/E versus 247. 8x for MP Materials Corp. — 247. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SBSW: 117. 0% to $21. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield), NEM (1. 0% yield), SBSW (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. LZM, MP do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LZM or SBSW or JPM or NEM or MP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 94), 1. 9% yield, +465. 8% 10Y return). Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) carries a higher beta of 2. 57 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +465. 8%, LZM: -60. 1%), 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 LZM and SBSW and JPM and NEM and MP?
These companies operate in different sectors (LZM (Basic Materials) and SBSW (Basic Materials) and JPM (Financial Services) and NEM (Basic Materials) and MP (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LZM is a small-cap high-growth stock; SBSW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; NEM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; MP is a mid-cap high-growth stock. JPM, NEM pay a dividend while LZM, SBSW, MP 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.