UAMY vs MP

For growth investors, United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) is the stronger pick with 162.

8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 35. 1% for MP Materials Corp. (MP). Analysts rate United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) 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.

Over the past 5 years, United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) delivered a total return of +1161%, compared to +149.

7% for MP Materials Corp. (MP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UAMY returned +37. 0% versus MP's +591. 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), MP Materials Corp.

(MP) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 40β versus United States Antimony Corporation's 1. 88β — meaning UAMY is approximately 34% more volatile than MP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 44% for MP Materials Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) is pulling ahead at 162.

8% versus 35. 1% for MP Materials Corp. (MP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MP Materials Corp. grew EPS 12. 3% year-over-year, compared to -150. 0% for United States Antimony Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, UAMY leads at 52. 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.

United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) is the more profitable company, earning -11.

1% net margin versus -31. 2% for MP Materials Corp. — meaning it keeps -11. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UAMY leads at -21. 5% versus -44. 6% for MP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UAMY leads at 25. 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.

On forward earnings alone, United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) trades at 200.

4x forward P/E versus 274. 3x for MP Materials Corp. — 74. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UAMY: 22. 5% to $13. 50.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, MP Materials Corp.

(MP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+591. 3% 10Y return). United States Antimony Corporation (UAMY) carries a higher beta of 1. 88 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MP: +591. 3%, UAMY: +37. 0%), 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.