Industrial Materials
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
TMC vs NB vs MP vs FCX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial Materials
Industrial Materials
Copper
TMC vs NB vs MP vs FCX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Industrial Materials | Copper |
| Market Cap | $2.36B | $736M | $11.98B | $88.60B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $305M | $26.42B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-296M | $-55M | $-71M | $2.73B |
| Gross Margin | — | — | 8.3% | 27.8% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | -40.9% | 27.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 254.2x | 23.1x |
| Total Debt | $12M | $131K | $1.04B | $11.50B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $3M | $26M | $1.17B | $3.35B |
TMC vs NB vs MP vs FCX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| TMC the metals comp… (TMC) | 100 | 687.7 | +587.7% |
| NioCorp Development… (NB) | 100 | 95.8 | -4.2% |
| MP Materials Corp. (MP) | 100 | 239.2 | +139.2% |
| Freeport-McMoRan In… (FCX) | 100 | 150.7 | +50.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TMC vs NB vs MP vs FCX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TMC lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
NB is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.64, Low D/E 0.4%, current ratio 14.12x
- 150.8% revenue growth vs TMC's -162.0%
MP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- beta 1.44
- Rev growth 35.1%, EPS growth 12.3%, 3Y rev CAGR -19.5%
- 5.7% 10Y total return vs FCX's 5.2%
- Beta 1.44, current ratio 7.24x
FCX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Lower P/E (23.1x vs 254.2x)
- 10.3% margin vs MP's -23.3%
- 1.0% yield; 5-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend
- 4.7% ROA vs TMC's -168.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 150.8% revenue growth vs TMC's -162.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (23.1x vs 254.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 10.3% margin vs MP's -23.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.44 vs TMC's 2.60 | |
| Dividends | 1.0% yield; 5-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +182.7% vs FCX's +66.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.7% ROA vs TMC's -168.3% |
TMC vs NB vs MP vs FCX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
TMC vs NB vs MP vs FCX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FCX leads in 3 of 6 categories
MP leads 1 • TMC leads 0 • NB leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FCX leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FCX and NB operate at a comparable scale, with $26.4B and $0 in trailing revenue. FCX is the more profitable business, keeping 10.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MP's -23.3%. On growth, MP holds the edge at +49.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $0 | $305M | $26.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$111M | -$25M | -$24M | $9.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$296M | -$55M | -$71M | $2.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$45M | -$30M | -$314M | $6.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | +8.3% | +27.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | -40.9% | +27.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | -23.3% | +10.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | -102.8% | +23.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +49.1% | +12.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.0% | — | +71.4% | +154.2% |
Valuation Metrics
FCX leads this category, winning 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.4B | $736M | $12.0B | $88.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.4B | $710M | $11.9B | $96.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -22.80x | -16.92x | -134.86x | 40.56x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 254.17x | 23.07x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.35x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 11.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | 43.49x | 3.44x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 9.41x | 4.80x | 2.89x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 79.39x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FCX leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FCX delivers a 8.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $-18 for NB. NB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MP's 0.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FCX scores 5/9 vs TMC's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -18.0% | -3.7% | +8.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -168.3% | -15.9% | -2.0% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -148.0% | -4.7% | +12.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.5% | -47.8% | -4.2% | +12.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.00x | 0.44x | 0.37x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $8M | -$25M | -$123M | $8.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $3M | $26M | $1.2B | $3.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $12M | $131,000 | $1.0B | $11.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -105.76x | -249.13x | -2.80x | 17.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MP five years ago would be worth $25,465 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,057 for TMC. Over the past 12 months, MP leads with a +182.7% total return vs FCX's +66.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TMC at 95.3% vs NB's 0.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -15.9% | +2.4% | +22.7% | +19.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +87.5% | +145.6% | +182.7% | +66.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +645.1% | +1.5% | +213.8% | +73.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -39.4% | -19.6% | +154.6% | +50.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -39.4% | -19.6% | +574.3% | +517.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +95.3% | +0.5% | +46.4% | +20.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MP and FCX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MP is the less volatile stock with a 1.44 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TMC's 2.60 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FCX currently trades 86.9% from its 52-week high vs NB's 48.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.60x | 1.64x | 1.44x | 1.85x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.35 | $12.58 | $100.25 | $70.97 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.83 | $2.17 | $18.64 | $35.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +50.2% | +48.4% | +67.3% | +86.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.9 | 54.7 | 60.1 | 48.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.5M | 4.4M | 5.7M | 15.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TMC as "Buy", NB as "Buy", MP as "Buy", FCX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 110.5% upside for TMC (target: $12) vs 8.7% for FCX (target: $67). FCX is the only dividend payer here at 0.97% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $12.00 | $9.35 | $81.00 | $67.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 2 | 12 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +1.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.60 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% |
FCX leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). MP leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
TMC vs NB vs MP vs FCX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TMC or NB or MP or FCX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is the stronger pick with 35. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 1% for Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX). Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX) offers the better valuation at 40. 6x trailing P/E (23. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TMC the metals company Inc. (TMC) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — TMC or NB or MP or FCX?
On forward P/E, Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
is actually cheaper at 23. 1x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TMC or NB or MP or FCX?
Over the past 5 years, MP Materials Corp.
(MP) delivered a total return of +154. 6%, compared to -39. 4% for TMC the metals company Inc. (TMC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MP returned +574. 3% versus TMC's -39. 4%. 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 — TMC or NB or MP or FCX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 44β versus TMC the metals company Inc. 's 2. 60β — meaning TMC is approximately 80% more volatile than MP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NioCorp Developments Ltd. (NB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 44% for MP Materials Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TMC or NB or MP or FCX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MP Materials Corp.
(MP) is pulling ahead at 35. 1% versus 1. 1% for Freeport-McMoRan Inc. (FCX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Freeport-McMoRan Inc. grew EPS 16. 9% year-over-year, compared to -16. 1% for NioCorp Developments Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FCX leads at 3. 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 — TMC or NB or MP or FCX?
Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 6% net margin versus -31. 2% for MP Materials Corp. — meaning it keeps 8. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FCX leads at 24. 4% versus -44. 6% for MP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FCX leads at 27. 0%, 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 TMC or NB or MP or FCX more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) trades at 23. 1x forward P/E versus 254. 2x for MP Materials Corp. — 231. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TMC: 110. 5% to $12. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — TMC or NB or MP or FCX?
In this comparison, FCX (1.
0% yield) pays a dividend. TMC, NB, MP do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TMC or NB or MP or FCX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
(FCX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1. 0% yield, +517. 6% 10Y return). TMC the metals company Inc. (TMC) carries a higher beta of 2. 60 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FCX: +517. 6%, TMC: -39. 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 TMC and NB and MP and FCX?
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: TMC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NB is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MP is a mid-cap high-growth stock; FCX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. FCX pays a dividend while TMC, NB, MP 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.