Other Precious Metals
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PLG vs SBSW vs PAL vs NEM vs AEM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gold
Integrated Freight & Logistics
Gold
Gold
PLG vs SBSW vs PAL vs NEM vs AEM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Other Precious Metals | Gold | Integrated Freight & Logistics | Gold | Gold |
| Market Cap | $215M | $9.33B | $204M | $125.72B | $94.03B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $238.26B | $430M | $17.23B | $11.87B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-5M | $-12.39B | $-33M | $5.26B | $4.45B |
| Gross Margin | — | 21.2% | 7.9% | 52.1% | 57.3% |
| Operating Margin | — | 18.9% | 3.8% | 49.3% | 52.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 0.3x | 17.6x | 11.2x | 13.9x |
| Total Debt | $258K | $44.34B | $98M | $474M | $321M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $417K | $17.16B | $14M | $7.65B | $2.87B |
PLG vs SBSW vs PAL vs NEM vs AEM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platinum Group Meta… (PLG) | 100 | 94.2 | -5.8% |
| Sibanye Stillwater … (SBSW) | 100 | 262.7 | +162.7% |
| Proficient Auto Log… (PAL) | 100 | 38.9 | -61.1% |
| Newmont Corporation (NEM) | 100 | 277.8 | +177.8% |
| Agnico Eagle Mines … (AEM) | 100 | 283.3 | +183.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PLG vs SBSW vs PAL vs NEM vs AEM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, PLG doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
SBSW is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and momentum is your priority.
- Lower P/E (0.3x vs 17.6x)
- +167.2% vs PAL's -9.6%
PAL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 78.7% revenue growth vs PLG's 6.1%
NEM is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 0.9% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs AEM's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
AEM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.52, yield 0.8%
- Rev growth 43.7%, EPS growth 134.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 29.3%
- 351.2% 10Y total return vs NEM's 293.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.52, Low D/E 1.3%, current ratio 2.02x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 78.7% revenue growth vs PLG's 6.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.3x vs 17.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 37.5% margin vs PAL's -7.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.52 vs PAL's 2.58, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.9% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs AEM's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +167.2% vs PAL's -9.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.7% ROA vs SBSW's -8.3%, ROIC 21.9% vs 22.9% |
PLG vs SBSW vs PAL vs NEM vs AEM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
PLG vs SBSW vs PAL vs NEM vs AEM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AEM leads in 3 of 6 categories
PAL leads 1 • PLG leads 0 • SBSW leads 0 • NEM leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AEM leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SBSW and PLG operate at a comparable scale, with $238.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. AEM is the more profitable business, keeping 37.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PAL's -7.8%. On growth, AEM holds the edge at +64.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $238.3B | $430M | $17.2B | $11.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$5M | $63.5B | $56M | $12.7B | $7.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$5M | -$12.4B | -$33M | $5.3B | $4.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$6M | -$9.5B | $22M | $12.9B | $4.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +21.2% | +7.9% | +52.1% | +57.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +18.9% | +3.8% | +49.3% | +52.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -5.2% | -7.8% | +30.5% | +37.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -4.0% | +5.2% | +75.0% | +37.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +25.4% | +12.8% | -100.0% | +64.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.2% | -10.0% | -6.7% | -100.0% | +199.0% |
Valuation Metrics
PAL leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.7x trailing earnings, NEM trades at a 16% valuation discount to AEM's 21.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AEM offers better value at 0.63x vs NEM's 1.38x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $215M | $9.3B | $204M | $125.7B | $94.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $215M | $11.0B | $287M | $118.6B | $91.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -40.47x | -31.78x | -6.07x | 17.70x | 21.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 0.25x | 17.63x | 11.17x | 13.94x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.38x | 0.63x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 5.67x | 5.16x | 9.03x | 11.47x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 1.27x | 0.47x | 5.69x | 7.90x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.09x | 3.47x | 0.64x | 3.69x | 3.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 90.73x | — | 17.22x | 22.06x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AEM leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AEM delivers a 19.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $19 in annual profit, vs $-28 for SBSW. PLG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SBSW's 1.00x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NEM scores 9/9 vs PAL's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -6.7% | -28.1% | -10.1% | +15.6% | +19.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.4% | -8.3% | -6.6% | +9.4% | +13.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -7.0% | +22.9% | +3.0% | +24.9% | +21.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -8.8% | +19.1% | +3.8% | +20.7% | +20.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 1.00x | 0.31x | 0.01x | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$159,000 | $27.2B | $84M | -$7.2B | -$2.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $417,000 | $17.2B | $14M | $7.6B | $2.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $258,000 | $44.3B | $98M | $474M | $321M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 1.31x | 2.49x | 50.54x | 73.32x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AEM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AEM five years ago would be worth $28,328 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,432 for PLG. Over the past 12 months, SBSW leads with a +167.2% total return vs PAL's -9.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AEM at 48.0% vs PAL's -20.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -25.3% | -6.5% | -25.2% | +12.4% | +10.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +41.5% | +167.2% | -9.6% | +112.0% | +61.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1.2% | +40.9% | -50.2% | +142.1% | +224.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -65.7% | -19.9% | -50.2% | +80.0% | +183.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.8% | +30.7% | -50.2% | +293.1% | +351.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.4% | +12.1% | -20.8% | +34.3% | +48.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NEM and AEM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
AEM is the less volatile stock with a 0.52 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PAL's 2.58 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NEM currently trades 84.1% from its 52-week high vs PLG's 43.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.31x | 1.44x | 2.47x | 0.86x | 0.66x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.04 | $21.29 | $10.97 | $134.88 | $255.24 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.08 | $4.52 | $5.76 | $48.27 | $103.38 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +43.1% | +62.0% | +66.9% | +84.1% | +73.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.8 | 57.0 | 54.8 | 53.5 | 43.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.7M | 5.7M | 298K | 9.2M | 2.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NEM and AEM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SBSW as "Hold", PAL as "Buy", NEM as "Buy", AEM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 63.5% upside for PAL (target: $12) vs 21.2% for NEM (target: $138). For income investors, NEM offers the higher dividend yield at 0.88% vs SBSW's 0.18%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $18.27 | $12.00 | $137.50 | $237.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 12 | 4 | 36 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.2% | — | +0.9% | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.40 | — | $1.00 | $1.45 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.8% | +0.7% |
AEM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). PAL leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
PLG vs SBSW vs PAL vs NEM vs AEM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Proficient Auto Logistics, Inc.
Common Stock (PAL) is the stronger pick with 78. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 1% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited (SBSW). Newmont Corporation (NEM) offers the better valuation at 17. 7x trailing P/E (11. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Proficient Auto Logistics, Inc. Common Stock (PAL) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM?
On trailing P/E, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the cheapest at 17.
7x versus Agnico Eagle Mines Limited at 21. 2x. On forward P/E, Sibanye Stillwater Limited is actually cheaper at 0. 3x — 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: Agnico Eagle Mines Limited wins at 0. 42x versus Newmont Corporation's 0. 87x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM?
Over the past 5 years, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) delivered a total return of +183.
3%, compared to -65. 7% for Platinum Group Metals Ltd. (PLG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AEM returned +363. 7% versus PLG's -93. 7%. 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 — PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
66β versus Proficient Auto Logistics, Inc. Common Stock's 2. 47β — meaning PAL is approximately 275% more volatile than AEM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Platinum Group Metals Ltd. (PLG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 100% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Proficient Auto Logistics, Inc.
Common Stock (PAL) is pulling ahead at 78. 7% versus 7. 1% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited (SBSW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Agnico Eagle Mines Limited grew EPS 134. 4% year-over-year, compared to -157. 4% for Proficient Auto Logistics, Inc. Common Stock. Over a 3-year CAGR, AEM leads at 29. 3% 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 — PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM?
Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the more profitable company, earning 37.
5% net margin versus -7. 8% for Proficient Auto Logistics, Inc. Common Stock — meaning it keeps 37. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AEM leads at 53. 1% versus 0. 0% for PLG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AEM leads at 58. 1%, 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 PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM 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, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 42x versus Newmont Corporation's 0. 87x. 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. 3x forward P/E versus 17. 6x for Proficient Auto Logistics, Inc. Common Stock — 17. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PAL: 63. 5% to $12. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM?
In this comparison, NEM (0.
9% yield), AEM (0. 8% yield), SBSW (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. PLG, PAL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is PLG or SBSW or PAL or NEM or AEM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
66), 0. 8% yield, +363. 7% 10Y return). Platinum Group Metals Ltd. (PLG) carries a higher beta of 2. 31 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AEM: +363. 7%, PLG: -93. 7%), 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 PLG and SBSW and PAL and NEM and AEM?
These companies operate in different sectors (PLG (Basic Materials) and SBSW (Basic Materials) and PAL (Industrials) and NEM (Basic Materials) and AEM (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: PLG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SBSW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PAL is a small-cap high-growth stock; NEM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; AEM is a mid-cap high-growth stock. NEM, AEM pay a dividend while PLG, SBSW, PAL 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.
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.