RGLD vs AEM

For growth investors, Royal Gold, Inc.

(RGLD) is the stronger pick with 44. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 43. 7% for Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM). Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) offers the better valuation at 21. 8x trailing P/E (13. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Royal Gold, Inc. (RGLD) a "Buy" — based on 28 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, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the cheapest at 21.

8x versus Royal Gold, Inc. at 35. 7x. On forward P/E, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited is actually cheaper at 13. 9x. 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 Royal Gold, Inc. 's 2. 62x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) delivered a total return of +194.

1%, compared to +107. 5% for Royal Gold, Inc. (RGLD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AEM returned +363. 7% versus RGLD's +349. 0%. 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), Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

66β versus Royal Gold, Inc. 's 0. 73β — meaning RGLD is approximately 11% more volatile than AEM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 13% for Royal Gold, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Royal Gold, Inc.

(RGLD) is pulling ahead at 44. 6% versus 43. 7% for Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Agnico Eagle Mines Limited grew EPS 134. 4% year-over-year, compared to 32. 5% for Royal Gold, Inc.. 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.

Royal Gold, Inc.

(RGLD) is the more profitable company, earning 45. 2% net margin versus 37. 5% for Agnico Eagle Mines Limited — meaning it keeps 45. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RGLD leads at 64. 5% versus 53. 1% for AEM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RGLD leads at 69. 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.

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 Royal Gold, Inc. 's 2. 62x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) trades at 13. 9x forward P/E versus 20. 3x for Royal Gold, Inc. — 6. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RGLD: 31. 8% to $315. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) offers the highest yield at 0. 7%, versus 0. 7% for Royal Gold, Inc. (RGLD).

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. 7% yield, +363. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (AEM: +363. 7%, RGLD: +349. 0%), 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.