COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
AYA vs FSM
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AYA scored 46.4, FSM scored 70.2 — FSM leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. AYA's fundamentals are as of March 2026, but FSM's are as of December 2025 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
AYA
Aya Gold & Silver Inc.
46.4
$26.65 · $3.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
23.8
FSM leads
FSM
Fortuna Mining Corp.
70.2
$12.07 · $3.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestFSM10.1x
- Fastest growthAYA+416.7%
- Strongest balance sheetFSM0.13
- Highest qualityAYA88 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueFSM-55%
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)
AYA
stronger →← stronger
FSM
88
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
82
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
23
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
84
AYA and FSM split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AYA
FSM
$56mC-
FCF
$613mC+
+416.7%A
Rev
+39.8%A
0.17B+
D/E
0.13A-
34.6xC
P/E
10.1xA
—
PEG
0.44A
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
AYA
FSM
360% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
55% below
~60%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-7%/yr
-83%
1-yr DCF upside
+75%
-78%
5-yr DCF upside
+121%
-69%
10-yr DCF upside
+201%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AYA
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
- Short track record
FSM
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
The companies
AYAAya Gold & Silver Inc.
Why now
Silver · market cap $3.8b. 8% off the 52-week high of $28.89. Revenue growing +417% — in hypergrowth territory.
Moat
Net margin 33% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Beta 1.70 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Trailing P/E 35x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 11.2x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
FSMFortuna Mining Corp.
Why now
Gold · market cap $3.6b. 13% off the 52-week high of $13.85. Revenue growing +40% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.44 — paying under fair value for the growth rate.
Moat
Net margin 33% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 18% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 197% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Beta 2.12 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Production-cost sensitivity — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the cycle while marginal producers burn it; watch the cost-per-unit trend, not just headline revenue.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
FSM leads AYA by 28 points (72.2 to 44.2), its sharpest advantage coming in P/E (grade A). Note they play different roles — AYA screens as growth, FSM screens as value — so the model rewards different traits for each.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 AYA and FSM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 23.8 points in favor of FSM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueAYA 22.7 · FSM 83.9FSM +61.2
- QualityAYA 88.0 · FSM 82.5AYA +5.5
- GrowthAYA 50.0 · FSM 50.0level
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.