TFPM vs NEM

For growth investors, Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp.

(TFPM) is the stronger pick with 47. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 19. 1% for Newmont Corporation (NEM). Newmont Corporation (NEM) offers the better valuation at 17. 7x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp. (TFPM) 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.

On trailing P/E, Newmont Corporation (NEM) is the cheapest at 17.

7x versus Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp. at 27. 0x. On forward P/E, Newmont Corporation is actually cheaper at 10. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp. wins at 0. 81x versus Newmont Corporation's 0. 85x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp.

(TFPM) delivered a total return of +265. 3%, compared to +80. 0% for Newmont Corporation (NEM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NEM returned +293. 1% versus TFPM's +265. 3%. 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), Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp.

(TFPM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 53β versus Newmont Corporation's 0. 75β — meaning NEM is approximately 42% more volatile than TFPM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp. (TFPM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 1% for Newmont Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp.

(TFPM) is pulling ahead at 47. 0% versus 19. 1% for Newmont Corporation (NEM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp. grew EPS 1191% year-over-year, compared to 124. 1% for Newmont Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, TFPM leads at 37. 6% 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.

Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp.

(TFPM) is the more profitable company, earning 61. 7% net margin versus 32. 1% for Newmont Corporation — meaning it keeps 61. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TFPM leads at 59. 3% versus 46. 9% for NEM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TFPM leads at 67. 6%, 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, Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp. (TFPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus Newmont Corporation's 0. 85x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Newmont Corporation (NEM) trades at 10. 9x forward P/E versus 22. 1x for Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp. — 11. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TFPM: 32. 7% to $43. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Newmont Corporation (NEM) offers the highest yield at 0. 9%, versus 0. 7% for Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp. (TFPM).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Triple Flag Precious Metals Corp.

(TFPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 53), 0. 7% yield, +265. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TFPM: +265. 3%, NEM: +293. 1%), 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.