SVM vs AG

For growth investors, First Majestic Silver Corp.

(AG) is the stronger pick with 128. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 38. 9% for Silvercorp Metals Inc. (SVM). Silvercorp Metals Inc. (SVM) offers the better valuation at 46. 5x trailing P/E (29. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Silvercorp Metals Inc. (SVM) a "Hold" — based on 5 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, Silvercorp Metals Inc.

(SVM) is the cheapest at 46. 5x versus First Majestic Silver Corp. at 60. 5x. On forward P/E, First Majestic Silver Corp. is actually cheaper at 20. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Silvercorp Metals Inc.

(SVM) delivered a total return of +123. 0%, compared to +33. 6% for First Majestic Silver Corp. (AG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SVM returned +521. 6% versus AG's +105. 5%. 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), Silvercorp Metals Inc.

(SVM) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 30β versus First Majestic Silver Corp. 's 1. 56β — meaning AG is approximately 20% more volatile than SVM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, First Majestic Silver Corp. (AG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 13% for Silvercorp Metals Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), First Majestic Silver Corp.

(AG) is pulling ahead at 128. 2% versus 38. 9% for Silvercorp Metals Inc. (SVM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: First Majestic Silver Corp. grew EPS 202. 9% year-over-year, compared to 40. 0% for Silvercorp Metals Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AG leads at 26. 8% 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.

Silvercorp Metals Inc.

(SVM) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 5% net margin versus 13. 1% for First Majestic Silver Corp. — meaning it keeps 19. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SVM leads at 34. 5% versus 27. 8% for AG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SVM leads at 41. 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.

On forward earnings alone, First Majestic Silver Corp.

(AG) trades at 20. 2x forward P/E versus 29. 4x for Silvercorp Metals Inc. — 9. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AG: 25. 1% to $26. 50.

In this comparison, SVM (0.

2% yield) pays a dividend. AG does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Silvercorp Metals Inc.

(SVM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 30), +521. 6% 10Y return). First Majestic Silver Corp. (AG) carries a higher beta of 1. 56 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SVM: +521. 6%, AG: +105. 5%), 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.