Gold
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SBSW vs NEM vs AEM vs KGC vs WPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Gold
Gold
Gold
Gold
SBSW vs NEM vs AEM vs KGC vs WPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Gold | Gold | Gold | Gold | Gold |
| Market Cap | $9.33B | $125.72B | $94.03B | $36.43B | $59.74B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $238.26B | $17.23B | $11.87B | $7.94B | $2.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-12.39B | $5.26B | $4.45B | $2.86B | $1.48B |
| Gross Margin | 21.2% | 52.1% | 57.3% | 52.8% | 75.1% |
| Operating Margin | 18.9% | 49.3% | 52.9% | 48.2% | 68.6% |
| Forward P/E | 0.2x | 10.9x | 13.5x | 9.7x | 24.2x |
| Total Debt | $44.34B | $474M | $321M | $777M | $8M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $17.16B | $7.65B | $2.87B | $1.75B | $1.15B |
SBSW vs NEM vs AEM vs KGC vs WPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sibanye Stillwater … (SBSW) | 100 | 179.7 | +79.7% |
| Newmont Corporation (NEM) | 100 | 194.1 | +94.1% |
| Agnico Eagle Mines … (AEM) | 100 | 293.3 | +193.3% |
| Kinross Gold Corpor… (KGC) | 100 | 464.4 | +364.4% |
| Wheaton Precious Me… (WPM) | 100 | 306.0 | +206.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SBSW vs NEM vs AEM vs KGC vs WPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SBSW has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and momentum.
- Lower P/E (0.2x vs 24.2x)
- +167.2% vs WPM's +55.7%
NEM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for dividends.
- 0.9% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs WPM's 0.5%
AEM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.52, yield 0.8%
- PEG 0.40 vs WPM's 1.07
- Beta 0.52, yield 0.8%, current ratio 2.02x
- Beta 0.52 vs SBSW's 1.27, lower leverage
KGC is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- 23.4% ROA vs SBSW's -8.3%, ROIC 29.9% vs 22.9%
WPM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 83.3%, EPS growth 181.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 30.3%
- 6.5% 10Y total return vs KGC's 499.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.63, Low D/E 0.1%, current ratio 7.78x
- 83.3% revenue growth vs SBSW's 7.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 83.3% revenue growth vs SBSW's 7.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.2x vs 24.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 63.6% margin vs SBSW's -5.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.52 vs SBSW's 1.27, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.9% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs WPM's 0.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +167.2% vs WPM's +55.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 23.4% ROA vs SBSW's -8.3%, ROIC 29.9% vs 22.9% |
SBSW vs NEM vs AEM vs KGC vs WPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
SBSW vs NEM vs AEM vs KGC vs WPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KGC leads in 2 of 6 categories
WPM leads 1 • SBSW leads 1 • NEM leads 0 • AEM leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WPM leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SBSW is the larger business by revenue, generating $238.3B annually — 102.3x WPM's $2.3B. WPM is the more profitable business, keeping 63.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SBSW's -5.2%. On growth, WPM holds the edge at +130.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $238.3B | $17.2B | $11.9B | $7.9B | $2.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $63.5B | $12.7B | $7.9B | $5.0B | $1.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$12.4B | $5.3B | $4.4B | $2.9B | $1.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$9.5B | $12.9B | $4.4B | $3.0B | $565M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.2% | +52.1% | +57.3% | +52.8% | +75.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +18.9% | +49.3% | +52.9% | +48.2% | +68.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.2% | +30.5% | +37.5% | +36.0% | +63.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.0% | +75.0% | +37.1% | +38.0% | +24.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +25.4% | -100.0% | +64.9% | +58.6% | +130.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -10.0% | -100.0% | +199.0% | +130.0% | +5.6% |
Valuation Metrics
SBSW leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.3x trailing earnings, KGC trades at a 62% valuation discount to WPM's 40.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AEM offers better value at 0.63x vs WPM's 1.77x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9.3B | $125.7B | $94.0B | $36.4B | $59.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $11.0B | $118.6B | $91.5B | $35.5B | $58.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -31.78x | 17.70x | 21.18x | 15.29x | 39.99x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 0.25x | 10.89x | 13.47x | 9.72x | 24.22x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.38x | 0.63x | 1.23x | 1.77x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 5.67x | 9.03x | 11.47x | 8.30x | 30.35x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.27x | 5.69x | 7.90x | 5.08x | 25.36x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.47x | 3.69x | 3.82x | 4.29x | 6.90x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 90.73x | 17.22x | 22.06x | 14.18x | 104.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KGC leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KGC delivers a 33.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $34 in annual profit, vs $-28 for SBSW. WPM 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 WPM's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -28.1% | +15.6% | +19.3% | +33.9% | +18.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -8.3% | +9.4% | +13.7% | +23.4% | +17.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +22.9% | +24.9% | +21.9% | +29.9% | +17.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +19.1% | +20.7% | +20.9% | +29.8% | +19.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.00x | 0.01x | 0.01x | 0.09x | 0.00x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $27.2B | -$7.2B | -$2.5B | -$975M | -$1.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $17.2B | $7.6B | $2.9B | $1.8B | $1.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $44.3B | $474M | $321M | $777M | $8M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.31x | 50.54x | 73.32x | 58.61x | 294.59x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KGC leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KGC five years ago would be worth $40,136 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,014 for SBSW. Over the past 12 months, SBSW leads with a +167.2% total return vs WPM's +55.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KGC at 79.7% vs SBSW's 12.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -6.5% | +12.4% | +10.4% | +7.6% | +11.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +167.2% | +112.0% | +61.4% | +95.7% | +55.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +40.9% | +142.1% | +224.3% | +480.5% | +157.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -19.9% | +80.0% | +183.3% | +301.4% | +207.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +30.7% | +293.1% | +351.2% | +499.1% | +649.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +12.1% | +34.3% | +48.0% | +79.7% | +37.1% |
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 SBSW's 1.27 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 SBSW's 62.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.27x | 0.75x | 0.52x | 0.69x | 0.63x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $21.29 | $134.88 | $255.24 | $39.11 | $165.76 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.52 | $48.27 | $103.38 | $13.28 | $75.42 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +62.0% | +84.1% | +73.5% | +77.8% | +79.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.0 | 53.5 | 43.1 | 47.5 | 49.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.7M | 9.2M | 2.5M | 8.9M | 2.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NEM and WPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SBSW as "Hold", NEM as "Buy", AEM as "Buy", KGC as "Buy", WPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 38.9% upside for KGC (target: $42) vs 15.9% for WPM (target: $153). 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 | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $18.27 | $137.50 | $237.71 | $42.25 | $152.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 36 | 31 | 28 | 20 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.2% | +0.9% | +0.8% | +0.4% | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.40 | $1.00 | $1.45 | $0.13 | $0.66 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.8% | +0.7% | +1.7% | 0.0% |
KGC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). WPM leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
SBSW vs NEM vs AEM vs KGC vs WPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.
(WPM) is the stronger pick with 83. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 1% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited (SBSW). Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) offers the better valuation at 15. 3x trailing P/E (9. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Newmont Corporation (NEM) a "Buy" — based on 36 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 — SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM?
On trailing P/E, Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) is the cheapest at 15.
3x versus Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. at 40. 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: Agnico Eagle Mines Limited wins at 0. 40x versus Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. 's 1. 07x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM?
Over the past 5 years, Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) delivered a total return of +301.
4%, compared to -19. 9% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited (SBSW). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: WPM returned +649. 6% versus SBSW's +30. 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 — SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
52β versus Sibanye Stillwater Limited's 1. 27β — meaning SBSW is approximately 143% more volatile than AEM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM) 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 — SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.
(WPM) is pulling ahead at 83. 3% versus 7. 1% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited (SBSW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. grew EPS 181. 2% year-over-year, compared to 34. 1% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, WPM leads at 30. 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 — SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM?
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.
(WPM) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 6% net margin versus -4. 0% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited — meaning it keeps 63. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WPM leads at 68. 8% versus 18. 5% for SBSW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — WPM leads at 72. 2%, 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 SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM 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. 40x versus Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. 's 1. 07x. 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 24. 2x for Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. — 24. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KGC: 38. 9% to $42. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Newmont Corporation (NEM) offers the highest yield at 0. 9%, versus 0. 2% for Sibanye Stillwater Limited (SBSW).
09Is SBSW or NEM or AEM or KGC or WPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.
(WPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 63), 0. 5% yield, +649. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WPM: +649. 6%, SBSW: +30. 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 SBSW and NEM and AEM and KGC and WPM?
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: SBSW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NEM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; AEM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; KGC is a mid-cap high-growth stock; WPM is a mid-cap high-growth stock. NEM, AEM, WPM pay a dividend while SBSW, KGC 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.