Copper
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TGB vs ERO vs SCCO vs FCX vs TECK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Copper
Copper
Copper
Industrial Materials
TGB vs ERO vs SCCO vs FCX vs TECK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Copper | Copper | Copper | Copper | Industrial Materials |
| Market Cap | $2.26B | $2.83B | $148.31B | $87.11B | $29.25B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $673M | $925M | $13.42B | $26.42B | $12.41B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-30M | $292M | $4.33B | $2.73B | $1.85B |
| Gross Margin | 26.0% | 42.7% | 56.7% | 27.8% | 30.3% |
| Operating Margin | 20.5% | 34.5% | 52.2% | 27.8% | 23.9% |
| Forward P/E | 13.1x | 6.6x | 25.4x | 22.4x | 13.0x |
| Total Debt | $747M | $631M | $7.41B | $11.50B | $10.39B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $188M | $105M | $4.30B | $3.35B | $5.01B |
TGB vs ERO vs SCCO vs FCX vs TECK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Taseko Mines Limited (TGB) | 100 | 1825.7 | +1725.7% |
| Ero Copper Corp. (ERO) | 100 | 231.5 | +131.5% |
| Southern Copper Cor… (SCCO) | 100 | 519.7 | +419.7% |
| Freeport-McMoRan In… (FCX) | 100 | 668.2 | +568.2% |
| Teck Resources Limi… (TECK) | 100 | 640.1 | +540.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TGB vs ERO vs SCCO vs FCX vs TECK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TGB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 12.7% 10Y total return vs SCCO's 6.7%
- +275.6% vs FCX's +65.3%
ERO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 70.0%, EPS growth 490.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 23.3%
- PEG 0.19 vs SCCO's 1.22
- 70.0% revenue growth vs FCX's 1.1%
- Lower P/E (6.6x vs 13.0x)
SCCO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.78, yield 1.7%
- Beta 1.78, yield 1.7%, current ratio 3.89x
- 32.3% margin vs TGB's -4.5%
- 1.7% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs FCX's 1.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
FCX lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
TECK is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.73, Low D/E 40.0%, current ratio 2.54x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 70.0% revenue growth vs FCX's 1.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.6x vs 13.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 32.3% margin vs TGB's -4.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.40 vs TGB's 1.80, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs FCX's 1.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +275.6% vs FCX's +65.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 21.4% ROA vs TGB's -1.3%, ROIC 38.6% vs 8.4% |
TGB vs ERO vs SCCO vs FCX vs TECK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
TGB vs ERO vs SCCO vs FCX vs TECK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SCCO leads in 2 of 6 categories
ERO leads 1 • TGB leads 1 • FCX leads 0 • TECK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SCCO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FCX is the larger business by revenue, generating $26.4B annually — 39.3x TGB's $673M. SCCO is the more profitable business, keeping 32.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TGB's -4.5%. On growth, ERO holds the edge at +107.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $673M | $925M | $13.4B | $26.4B | $12.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $249M | $473M | $7.9B | $9.6B | $4.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$30M | $292M | $4.3B | $2.7B | $1.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $15M | $121M | $3.4B | $6.2B | $482M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +26.0% | +42.7% | +56.7% | +27.8% | +30.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +20.5% | +34.5% | +52.2% | +27.8% | +23.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.5% | +31.6% | +32.3% | +10.3% | +14.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.2% | +13.0% | +25.5% | +23.6% | +3.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +45.3% | +107.5% | +39.0% | +12.2% | +72.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +117.7% | +32.5% | +54.5% | +154.2% | +128.8% |
Valuation Metrics
ERO leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.5x trailing earnings, ERO trades at a 74% valuation discount to FCX's 39.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ERO offers better value at 0.29x vs SCCO's 1.64x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.3B | $2.8B | $148.3B | $87.1B | $29.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.7B | $3.4B | $151.4B | $95.3B | $33.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -106.48x | 10.50x | 34.26x | 39.88x | 29.29x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.15x | 6.64x | 25.40x | 22.41x | 12.98x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.29x | 1.64x | 1.33x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.62x | 8.17x | 19.24x | 11.16x | 12.33x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.58x | 3.53x | 11.05x | 3.38x | 3.71x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.46x | 3.01x | 13.55x | 2.84x | 1.58x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 30.98x | 43.28x | 78.05x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SCCO leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SCCO delivers a 42.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $42 in annual profit, vs $-5 for TGB. FCX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.37x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TGB's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ERO scores 8/9 vs TGB's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -5.0% | +31.1% | +42.0% | +8.9% | +7.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.3% | +15.3% | +21.4% | +4.7% | +4.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.4% | +15.5% | +38.6% | +12.8% | +4.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.5% | +18.6% | +39.2% | +12.4% | +4.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.96x | 0.67x | 0.67x | 0.37x | 0.40x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $559M | $526M | $3.1B | $8.1B | $5.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $188M | $105M | $4.3B | $3.4B | $5.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $747M | $631M | $7.4B | $11.5B | $10.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.44x | 14.60x | 19.33x | 17.68x | 4.16x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TGB leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TGB five years ago would be worth $30,335 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,903 for ERO. Over the past 12 months, TGB leads with a +275.6% total return vs FCX's +65.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TGB at 68.3% vs ERO's 9.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +29.5% | -6.7% | +21.4% | +17.3% | +26.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +275.6% | +101.9% | +110.5% | +65.3% | +79.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +377.0% | +31.3% | +151.0% | +70.7% | +40.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +203.3% | +19.0% | +167.4% | +44.3% | +147.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1267.9% | +597.4% | +668.4% | +507.7% | +599.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +68.3% | +9.5% | +35.9% | +19.5% | +12.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ERO and TECK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ERO is the less volatile stock with a 1.40 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TGB's 1.80 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TECK currently trades 95.0% from its 52-week high vs ERO's 68.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.80x | 1.40x | 1.78x | 1.79x | 1.73x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.25 | $39.80 | $223.89 | $70.97 | $63.97 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.89 | $12.79 | $85.72 | $35.15 | $30.98 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +78.4% | +68.1% | +80.2% | +85.4% | +95.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.1 | 48.8 | 54.1 | 49.1 | 62.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.9M | 1.1M | 1.6M | 15.4M | 3.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — SCCO and FCX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TGB as "Hold", ERO as "Hold", SCCO as "Hold", FCX as "Buy", TECK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 16.2% upside for ERO (target: $32) vs -48.3% for TGB (target: $4). For income investors, SCCO offers the higher dividend yield at 1.65% vs TECK's 0.60%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $3.75 | $31.50 | $156.40 | $67.00 | $64.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 3 | 30 | 41 | 26 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +1.7% | +1.0% | +0.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | 5 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.96 | $0.60 | $0.50 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +2.5% |
SCCO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ERO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
TGB vs ERO vs SCCO vs FCX vs TECK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Ero Copper Corp.
(ERO) is the stronger pick with 70. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 1% for Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX). Ero Copper Corp. (ERO) offers the better valuation at 10. 5x trailing P/E (6. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX) a "Buy" — based on 41 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 — TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK?
On trailing P/E, Ero Copper Corp.
(ERO) is the cheapest at 10. 5x versus Freeport-McMoRan Inc. at 39. 9x. On forward P/E, Ero Copper Corp. is actually cheaper at 6. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Ero Copper Corp. wins at 0. 19x versus Southern Copper Corporation's 1. 22x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK?
Over the past 5 years, Taseko Mines Limited (TGB) delivered a total return of +203.
3%, compared to +19. 0% for Ero Copper Corp. (ERO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TGB returned +1268% versus FCX's +507. 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 — TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Ero Copper Corp.
(ERO) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 40β versus Taseko Mines Limited's 1. 80β — meaning TGB is approximately 28% more volatile than ERO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 37% versus 96% for Taseko Mines Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ero Copper Corp.
(ERO) is pulling ahead at 70. 0% versus 1. 1% for Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Ero Copper Corp. grew EPS 490. 9% year-over-year, compared to -104. 2% for Taseko Mines Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, ERO leads at 23. 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 — TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK?
Ero Copper Corp.
(ERO) is the more profitable company, earning 33. 6% net margin versus -4. 5% for Taseko Mines Limited — meaning it keeps 33. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SCCO leads at 52. 2% versus 16. 5% for TECK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SCCO leads at 56. 7%, 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 TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK 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, Ero Copper Corp. (ERO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 19x versus Southern Copper Corporation's 1. 22x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Ero Copper Corp. (ERO) trades at 6. 6x forward P/E versus 25. 4x for Southern Copper Corporation — 18. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ERO: 16. 2% to $31. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK?
In this comparison, SCCO (1.
7% yield), FCX (1. 0% yield), TECK (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. TGB, ERO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TGB or ERO or SCCO or FCX or TECK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Southern Copper Corporation (SCCO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1.
7% yield, +668. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SCCO: +668. 4%, ERO: +597. 4%), 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 TGB and ERO and SCCO and FCX and TECK?
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: TGB is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ERO is a small-cap high-growth stock; SCCO is a mid-cap high-growth stock; FCX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; TECK is a mid-cap high-growth stock. SCCO, FCX, TECK pay a dividend while TGB, ERO 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.