Industrial Materials
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
LZM vs PPTA vs SBSW vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Other Precious Metals
Gold
Banks - Diversified
LZM vs PPTA vs SBSW vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial Materials | Other Precious Metals | Gold | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $354M | $2.93B | $6.89B | $875.80B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $0.00 | $238.26B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-60M | $-141M | $-12.39B | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | -51.3% | — | 21.2% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | -55.8% | — | 18.9% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 0.2x | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $58M | $244K | $44.34B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $774M | $17.16B | $343.34B |
LZM vs PPTA vs SBSW vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lifezone Metals Lim… (LZM) | 100 | 39.7 | -60.3% |
| Perpetua Resources … (PPTA) | 100 | 507.2 | +407.2% |
| Sibanye Stillwater … (SBSW) | 100 | 78.6 | -21.4% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 202.5 | +102.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LZM vs PPTA vs SBSW vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LZM is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 6.5%, EPS growth 71.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -28.8%
- 6.5% revenue growth vs PPTA's -6.7%
PPTA is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 2.17, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 3178.49x
SBSW is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and momentum is your priority.
- Better valuation composite
- +44.0% vs LZM's -8.2%
JPM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.95, yield 1.9%
- 454.4% 10Y total return vs PPTA's 189.4%
- Beta 0.95, yield 1.9%, current ratio 0.52x
- 20.4% margin vs LZM's -50.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.5% revenue growth vs PPTA's -6.7% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs LZM's -50.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.95 vs LZM's 2.53 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs SBSW's 0.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +44.0% vs LZM's -8.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.3% ROA vs LZM's -36.2%, ROIC 4.5% vs -13.1% |
LZM vs PPTA vs SBSW vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
LZM vs PPTA vs SBSW vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 3 of 6 categories
SBSW leads 2 • PPTA leads 1 • LZM leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and PPTA operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LZM's -50.0%. On growth, LZM holds the edge at +7.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $0 | $238.3B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$64M | -$146M | $63.5B | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$60M | -$141M | -$12.4B | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$66M | -$152M | -$9.5B | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -51.3% | — | +21.2% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -55.8% | — | +18.9% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -50.0% | — | -5.2% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -55.3% | — | -4.0% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.1% | — | +25.4% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +56.8% | -4.3% | -10.0% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
SBSW leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, SBSW's 4.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than JPM's 18.1x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $354M | $2.9B | $6.9B | $875.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $392M | $2.2B | $8.5B | $1.47T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -23.18x | -21.70x | -23.70x | 15.64x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 0.20x | 14.08x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.20x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 4.44x | 18.11x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 335.10x | — | 0.95x | 3.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.32x | 2.54x | 2.58x | 2.42x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 67.66x | 8.68x |
Profitability & Efficiency
SBSW leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $-61 for LZM. PPTA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SBSW scores 6/9 vs PPTA's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -60.9% | -20.7% | -28.1% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -36.2% | -20.2% | -8.3% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -13.1% | -125.8% | +22.9% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.8% | -25.9% | +19.1% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.80x | 0.00x | 1.00x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $38M | -$773M | $27.2B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $774M | $17.2B | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $58M | $244,000 | $44.3B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -4.30x | — | 1.31x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PPTA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PPTA five years ago would be worth $27,224 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,996 for LZM. Over the past 12 months, SBSW leads with a +44.0% total return vs LZM's -8.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PPTA at 73.0% vs LZM's -28.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.0% | -4.5% | -30.5% | -2.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -8.2% | +42.1% | +44.0% | +19.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -63.2% | +417.4% | +42.7% | +133.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.0% | +172.2% | -34.1% | +110.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.0% | +189.4% | +13.4% | +454.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -28.4% | +73.0% | +12.6% | +32.6% |
Risk & Volatility
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JPM is the less volatile stock with a 0.95 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LZM's 2.53 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 93.0% from its 52-week high vs SBSW's 45.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.57x | 2.33x | 2.28x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.40 | $37.37 | $21.29 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.07 | $11.68 | $6.72 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +61.6% | +62.7% | +45.7% | +93.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 33.5 | 32.6 | 26.4 | 54.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 735K | 1.5M | 4.5M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LZM as "Buy", PPTA as "Buy", SBSW as "Hold", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 119.7% upside for SBSW (target: $21) vs 8.1% for JPM (target: $339). For income investors, JPM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.90% vs SBSW's 0.25%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $7.00 | $43.50 | $21.40 | $338.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 3 | 12 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.2% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 0 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.40 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). SBSW leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency).
LZM vs PPTA vs SBSW vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) is the stronger pick with 652.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 15. 6x trailing P/E (14. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) 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 — LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM?
On forward P/E, Sibanye Stillwater Limited is actually cheaper at 0.
2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, Perpetua Resources Corp.
(PPTA) delivered a total return of +172. 2%, compared to -60. 0% for Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus LZM's -60. 1%. 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 — LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 94β versus Lifezone Metals Limited's 2. 57β — meaning LZM is approximately 173% more volatile than JPM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Perpetua Resources Corp. (PPTA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) is pulling ahead at 652.
2% versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lifezone Metals Limited grew EPS 71. 2% year-over-year, compared to -590. 9% for Perpetua Resources Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, SBSW leads at -4. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -1289. 2% for Lifezone Metals Limited — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus -1724. 9% for LZM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JPM leads at 59. 9%, 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 LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Sibanye Stillwater Limited (SBSW) trades at 0.
2x forward P/E versus 14. 1x for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — 13. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SBSW: 119. 7% to $21. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield), SBSW (0. 2% yield) pay a dividend. LZM, PPTA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LZM or PPTA or SBSW or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 94), 1. 9% yield, +465. 8% 10Y return). Lifezone Metals Limited (LZM) carries a higher beta of 2. 57 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +465. 8%, LZM: -60. 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.
10What are the main differences between LZM and PPTA and SBSW and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (LZM (Basic Materials) and PPTA (Basic Materials) and SBSW (Basic Materials) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LZM is a small-cap high-growth stock; PPTA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SBSW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. JPM pays a dividend while LZM, PPTA, SBSW 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.