MUX
McEwen Mining Inc.
Other Precious Metals
Market Cap$1.39B
5Y Perf.+158.6%
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Try these comparisons:
Stock Comparison
MUX vs LIN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
LIN
Linde plc
Chemicals - Specialty
Market Cap$228.85B
5Y Perf.+144.1%
MUX vs LIN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | MUX | LIN |
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Other Precious Metals | Chemicals - Specialty |
| Market Cap | $1.39B | $228.85B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $162M | $34.66B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $74M | $7.13B |
| Gross Margin | 32.9% | 46.0% |
| Operating Margin | 22.2% | 28.8% |
| Forward P/E | 22.2x | 27.7x |
| Total Debt | $926K | $26.99B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $51M | $5.06B |
MUX vs LIN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
MUX
LIN
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| McEwen Mining Inc. (MUX) | 100 | 258.6 | +158.6% |
| Linde plc (LIN) | 100 | 244.1 | +144.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MUX vs LIN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: MUX leads in 5 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and valuation and capital efficiency. Linde plc is the stronger pick specifically for capital preservation and lower volatility and dividend income and shareholder returns. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
MUX
McEwen Mining Inc.
The Growth Play
MUX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 13.2%, EPS growth 168.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 21.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.27, Low D/E 0.2%, current ratio 1.69x
- 13.2% revenue growth vs LIN's 3.0%
Best for: growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night
LIN
Linde plc
The Income Pick
LIN is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 6 yrs, beta 0.24, yield 1.2%
- 375.2% 10Y total return vs MUX's -0.1%
- Beta 0.24, yield 1.2%, current ratio 0.88x
Best for: income & stability and long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | MUX | 13.2% revenue growth vs LIN's 3.0% |
| Value | MUX | Lower P/E (22.2x vs 27.7x) |
| Quality / Margins | MUX | 45.7% margin vs LIN's 20.6% |
| Stability / Safety | LIN | Beta 0.24 vs MUX's 1.27 |
| Dividends | LIN | 1.2% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs MUX's 0.2% |
| Momentum (1Y) | MUX | +198.5% vs LIN's +11.2% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | MUX | 9.0% ROA vs LIN's 8.3%, ROIC -1.9% vs 11.3% |
MUX vs LIN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FY 2025
FY 2025
MUX vs LIN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLLINLAGGINGMUX
MUXMcEwen Mining Inc.
1leads
LINLinde plc
5leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs MUXMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
LIN4/6
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
LIN3/5
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
LIN5/9
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
MUX5/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
LIN2/2
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
LIN2/2
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LIN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LIN is the larger business by revenue, generating $34.7B annually — 214.1x MUX's $162M. MUX is the more profitable business, keeping 45.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LIN's 20.6%. On growth, LIN holds the edge at +8.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | MUXMcEwen Mining Inc. | LINLinde plc |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $162M | $34.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $61M | $12.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $74M | $7.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$24M | $5.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +32.9% | +46.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +22.2% | +28.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +45.7% | +20.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -14.7% | +14.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +8.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.9% | +13.4% |
LIN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
LIN leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 33.8x trailing earnings, LIN trades at a 15% valuation discount to MUX's 39.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LIN's 19.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MUX's 74.7x.
| Metric | MUXMcEwen Mining Inc. | LINLinde plc |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.4B | $228.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.3B | $250.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 39.61x | 33.85x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 22.21x | 27.67x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.33x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 74.65x | 19.75x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 7.03x | 6.73x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.31x | 5.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 44.97x |
LIN leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LIN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LIN delivers a 17.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $14 for MUX. MUX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LIN's 0.68x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LIN scores 6/9 vs MUX's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | MUXMcEwen Mining Inc. | LINLinde plc |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.6% | +17.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +9.0% | +8.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.9% | +11.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -1.9% | +13.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.68x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$50M | $21.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $51M | $5.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $926,000 | $27.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -1.52x | 34.52x |
LIN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MUX leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MUX five years ago would be worth $17,977 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $17,394 for LIN. Over the past 12 months, MUX leads with a +198.5% total return vs LIN's +11.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MUX at 38.1% vs LIN's 11.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | MUXMcEwen Mining Inc. | LINLinde plc |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +25.1% | +15.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +198.5% | +11.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +163.5% | +39.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +79.8% | +73.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -0.1% | +375.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +38.1% | +11.8% |
MUX leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LIN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LIN is the less volatile stock with a 0.24 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MUX's 1.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LIN currently trades 94.7% from its 52-week high vs MUX's 78.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | MUXMcEwen Mining Inc. | LINLinde plc |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.27x | 0.24x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $29.70 | $521.28 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $6.88 | $387.78 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +78.7% | +94.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.0 | 51.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 992K | 2.3M |
LIN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
LIN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates MUX as "Buy" and LIN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 28.4% upside for MUX (target: $30) vs 9.3% for LIN (target: $540). For income investors, LIN offers the higher dividend yield at 1.21% vs MUX's 0.18%.
| Metric | MUXMcEwen Mining Inc. | LINLinde plc |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $30.00 | $539.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 28 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.2% | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 6 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.04 | $6.00 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.0% |
LIN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway
LIN leads in 5 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). MUX leads in 1 (Total Returns).
Best OverallLinde plc (LIN)Leads 5 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
MUX vs LIN: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MUX or LIN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, McEwen Mining Inc.
(MUX) is the stronger pick with 13. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 0% for Linde plc (LIN). Linde plc (LIN) offers the better valuation at 33. 8x trailing P/E (27. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate McEwen Mining Inc. (MUX) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — MUX or LIN?
On trailing P/E, Linde plc (LIN) is the cheapest at 33.
8x versus McEwen Mining Inc. at 39. 6x. On forward P/E, McEwen Mining Inc. is actually cheaper at 22. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MUX or LIN?
Over the past 5 years, McEwen Mining Inc.
(MUX) delivered a total return of +79. 8%, compared to +73. 9% for Linde plc (LIN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LIN returned +375. 2% versus MUX's -0. 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 — MUX or LIN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Linde plc (LIN) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
24β versus McEwen Mining Inc. 's 1. 27β — meaning MUX is approximately 430% more volatile than LIN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, McEwen Mining Inc. (MUX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 68% for Linde plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MUX or LIN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), McEwen Mining Inc.
(MUX) is pulling ahead at 13. 2% versus 3. 0% for Linde plc (LIN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: McEwen Mining Inc. grew EPS 168. 6% year-over-year, compared to 7. 1% for Linde plc. Over a 3-year CAGR, MUX leads at 21. 4% 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 — MUX or LIN?
Linde plc (LIN) is the more profitable company, earning 20.
3% net margin versus 17. 4% for McEwen Mining Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LIN leads at 26. 3% versus -6. 5% for MUX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LIN leads at 43. 3%, 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 MUX or LIN more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, McEwen Mining Inc.
(MUX) trades at 22. 2x forward P/E versus 27. 7x for Linde plc — 5. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MUX: 28. 4% to $30. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — MUX or LIN?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Linde plc (LIN) offers the highest yield at 1. 2%, versus 0. 2% for McEwen Mining Inc. (MUX).
09Is MUX or LIN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Linde plc (LIN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
24), 1. 2% yield, +375. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LIN: +375. 2%, MUX: -0. 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 MUX and LIN?
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.
LIN pays a dividend while MUX does 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
Revenue Growth>
%
(MUX: -100.0% · LIN: 8.2%)Net Margin>
%
(MUX: 45.7% · LIN: 20.6%)P/E Ratio<
x
(MUX: 39.6x · LIN: 33.8x)You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.