Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BTG scored 71.5, FSM scored 69.4 — BTG leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. BTG's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but FSM's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
BTG
B2Gold Corp.
Gold · Quality-Growth
71.5
$5.25 · $6.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
2.1
BTG leads
FSM
Fortuna Mining Corp.
Gold · Quality-Growth
69.4
$10.92 · $3.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestFSM9.3x
Fastest growthBTG+60.9%
Strongest balance sheetBTG0.11
Highest qualityFSM81 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueFSM-63%
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)
BTG
stronger →← stronger
FSM
79
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
81
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
93
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
82
BTG and FSM split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BTG
FSM
$923mC+
FCF
$613mC+
+60.9%A
Rev
+39.8%A
0.11A-
D/E
0.13B+
9.5xA-
P/E
9.3xA-
0.11A
PEG
0.38A
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
BTG
FSM
57% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
63% below
~-6%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-11%/yr
+80%
1-yr DCF upside
+111%
+132%
5-yr DCF upside
+170%
+233%
10-yr DCF upside
+279%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
BTG
Why this score
Cut its dividend
Cyclical growth
FSM
Why this score
Cyclical growth
The companies
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.
FSMFortuna Mining Corp.
Gold · $10.92 · beta 2.18
Why now
Gold · market cap $3.2b. Down 21% from 52-week high of $13.85 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +40% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.38 — 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% is above 15% — 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.
Risk
Beta 2.18 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 BTG by 0.8 points (70.6 to 69.8). A contrarian could still prefer BTG, which trades about 53% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward.
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 BTG and FSM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 2.1 points in favor of BTG. The widest single difference is Value, where BTG leads by 10.6 points.
ValueBTG 92.8 · FSM 82.2BTG +10.6
QualityBTG 78.7 · FSM 81.4level
GrowthBTG 50.0 · FSM 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 FSM the better stock?
BTG scores higher: BTG 71.5, FSM 69.4 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 FSM differ most?
The widest gap is value, where BTG leads by 11 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. The other two pillars are close enough to call level, so this is the one place they genuinely separate.
How are BTG and FSM 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.