Industrial Materials
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
NB vs SLI vs LAC vs MP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial Materials
Industrial Materials
Industrial Materials
NB vs SLI vs LAC vs MP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials |
| Market Cap | $736M | $803M | $1.35B | $11.98B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $305M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-55M | $-48M | $-241M | $-71M |
| Gross Margin | — | — | — | 8.3% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | — | -40.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 254.2x |
| Total Debt | $131K | $477K | $23M | $1.04B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $26M | $32M | $594M | $1.17B |
NB vs SLI vs LAC vs MP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| NioCorp Development… (NB) | 100 | 95.8 | -4.2% |
| Standard Lithium Lt… (SLI) | 100 | 103.4 | +3.4% |
| Lithium Americas Co… (LAC) | 100 | 41.4 | -58.6% |
| MP Materials Corp. (MP) | 100 | 239.2 | +139.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NB vs SLI vs LAC vs MP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NB is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth is your priority.
- 150.8% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0%
SLI lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
LAC is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.51, Low D/E 2.4%, current ratio 10.33x
- 1.4% margin vs MP's -23.3%
MP carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 1.44
- Rev growth 35.1%, EPS growth 12.3%, 3Y rev CAGR -19.5%
- 5.7% 10Y total return vs SLI's 222.1%
- Beta 1.44, current ratio 7.24x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 150.8% revenue growth vs LAC's -6.0% | |
| Quality / Margins | 1.4% margin vs MP's -23.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.44 vs NB's 1.64 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +182.7% vs LAC's +77.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -2.0% ROA vs LAC's -16.6%, ROIC -4.7% vs -7.1% |
NB vs SLI vs LAC vs MP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
NB vs SLI vs LAC vs MP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MP leads in 4 of 6 categories
NB leads 0 • SLI leads 0 • LAC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MP leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MP and LAC operate at a comparable scale, with $305M and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $0 | $0 | $305M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$25M | $28M | -$32M | -$24M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$55M | -$48M | -$241M | -$71M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$30M | -$18M | -$648M | -$314M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | +8.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | -40.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | -23.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | -102.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +49.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | -21.4% | +71.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — LAC and MP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $736M | $803M | $1.4B | $12.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $710M | $771M | $780M | $11.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -16.92x | -13.10x | -26.52x | -134.86x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 254.17x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | 43.49x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9.41x | 3.20x | 1.18x | 4.80x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
MP leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MP delivers a -3.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-4 in annual profit, vs $-27 for LAC. SLI carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MP's 0.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NB scores 4/9 vs LAC's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -18.0% | -17.8% | -26.9% | -3.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -15.9% | -15.9% | -16.6% | -2.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -148.0% | -11.2% | -7.1% | -4.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -47.8% | -10.7% | -3.9% | -4.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.00x | 0.02x | 0.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$25M | -$31M | -$571M | -$123M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $26M | $32M | $594M | $1.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $131,000 | $476,715 | $23M | $1.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -249.13x | -1559.24x | — | -2.80x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MP leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MP five years ago would be worth $25,465 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,114 for LAC. Over the past 12 months, MP leads with a +182.7% total return vs LAC's +77.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MP at 46.4% vs LAC's -24.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.4% | -17.8% | +16.8% | +22.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +145.6% | +172.9% | +77.4% | +182.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1.5% | +17.7% | -56.3% | +213.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -19.6% | +21.3% | -28.9% | +154.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -19.6% | +222.1% | +229.6% | +574.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.5% | +5.6% | -24.1% | +46.4% |
Risk & Volatility
MP leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MP is the less volatile stock with a 1.44 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NB's 1.64 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MP currently trades 67.3% from its 52-week high vs NB's 48.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.64x | 1.62x | 1.51x | 1.44x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.58 | $6.40 | $10.52 | $100.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.17 | $1.41 | $2.47 | $18.64 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +48.4% | +61.4% | +52.9% | +67.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.7 | 53.3 | 61.7 | 60.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.4M | 1.8M | 9.1M | 5.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NB as "Buy", SLI as "Buy", LAC as "Hold", MP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 53.5% upside for NB (target: $9) vs 20.1% for MP (target: $81).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $9.35 | $4.75 | $7.00 | $81.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 3 | 15 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
MP leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 1 category is tied.
NB vs SLI vs LAC vs MP: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NB or SLI or LAC or MP a better buy right now?
Analysts rate NioCorp Developments Ltd.
(NB) 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 is the better long-term investment — NB or SLI or LAC or MP?
Over the past 5 years, MP Materials Corp.
(MP) delivered a total return of +154. 6%, compared to -28. 9% for Lithium Americas Corp. (LAC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MP returned +574. 3% versus NB's -19. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — NB or SLI or LAC or MP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 44β versus NioCorp Developments Ltd. 's 1. 64β — meaning NB is approximately 13% more volatile than MP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Standard Lithium Ltd. (SLI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 44% for MP Materials Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — NB or SLI or LAC or MP?
On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MP Materials Corp.
grew EPS 12. 3% year-over-year, compared to -757. 1% for Lithium Americas Corp.. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — NB or SLI or LAC or MP?
NioCorp Developments Ltd.
(NB) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -31. 2% for MP Materials Corp. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NB leads at 0. 0% versus -44. 6% for MP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NB leads at 0. 0%, 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.
06Is NB or SLI or LAC or MP more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NB: 53.
5% to $9. 35.
07Which pays a better dividend — NB or SLI or LAC or MP?
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.
08Is NB or SLI or LAC or MP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+574. 3% 10Y return). NioCorp Developments Ltd. (NB) carries a higher beta of 1. 64 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MP: +574. 3%, NB: -19. 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.
09What are the main differences between NB and SLI and LAC and MP?
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: NB is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SLI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LAC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MP 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.