Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AEM scored 66.8, BTG scored 71.5 — BTG leads.
Compare another set
AEM
Agnico Eagle Mines Limited
Gold · Quality-Growth
66.8
$189.02 · $95.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.7
BTG leads
BTG
B2Gold Corp.
Gold · Quality-Growth
71.5
$5.25 · $6.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestBTG9.5x
Fastest growthBTG+60.9%
Strongest balance sheetAEM0.01
Highest qualityAEM91 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueBTG-57%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
AEM
stronger →← stronger
BTG
91
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
79
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
65
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
93
AEM and BTG split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AEM
BTG
$4.5bB
FCF
$923mC+
+43.7%A
Rev
+60.9%A
0.01A
D/E
0.11A-
16.2xB
P/E
9.5xA-
28.15D
PEG
0.11A
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
AEM
BTG
25% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
57% below
~4%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-6%/yr
+11%
1-yr DCF upside
+80%
+34%
5-yr DCF upside
+132%
+76%
10-yr DCF upside
+233%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AEM
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
BTG
Why this score
Cut its dividend
Cyclical growth
The companies
AEMAgnico Eagle Mines Limited
Gold · $189.02 · beta 0.64
Why now
Gold · market cap $95.7b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $255.24 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +44% — in hypergrowth territory. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $220.32 (implying +17% upside).
Moat
Net margin 40% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 23% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. $95.7b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Hedge-book exposure — many commodity producers hedge forward production; if the hedge book is concentrated at prices well below spot, the upside the market expects is already locked away.
BTGB2Gold Corp.
Gold · $5.25 · beta 1.41
Why now
Gold · market cap $6.9b. 17% off the 52-week high of $6.29. Revenue growing +61% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.11 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $6.45 (implying +23% upside).
Moat
Net margin 21% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 23% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 114% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Beta 1.41 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Hedge-book exposure — many commodity producers hedge forward production; if the hedge book is concentrated at prices well below spot, the upside the market expects is already locked away.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where AEM and BTG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 4.7 points in favor of BTG. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueAEM 65.3 · BTG 92.8BTG +27.5
QualityAEM 91.3 · BTG 78.7AEM +12.6
GrowthAEM 50.0 · BTG 50.0level
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is BTG or AEM the better stock?
BTG scores higher: BTG 71.5, AEM 66.8 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do BTG and AEM differ most?
The widest gap is value, where BTG leads by 28 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are BTG and AEM scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.