COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
BTG vs SLVM
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BTG scored 70.4, SLVM scored 34.3 — BTG leads.
Compare another set
BTG
B2Gold Corp
70.4
$5.52 · $7.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
36.1
BTG leads
SLVM
Sylvamo Corp
34.3
$36.79 · $1.5B
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestBTG9.9x
- Fastest growthBTG+60.9%
- Strongest balance sheetBTG0.11
- Highest qualityBTG76 / 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)
BTG
stronger →← stronger
SLVM
76
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
54
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
15
92
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
51
BTG is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BTG
SLVM
$923mC+
FCF
$10mC-
+60.9%A
Rev
-9.3%D
0.11A-
D/E
0.88B
9.9xA
P/E
15.2xB+
0.10A
PEG
—
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
SLVM
57% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
913% above
~-6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~60%/yr
+77%
1-yr DCF upside
-89%
+131%
5-yr DCF upside
-90%
+238%
10-yr DCF upside
-92%
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
SLVM
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
BTGB2Gold Corp
Why now
Gold · market cap $7.3b. 12% off the 52-week high of $6.29. Revenue growing +61% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.10 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $6.15 (implying +11% 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 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
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.
SLVMSylvamo Corp
Why now
Paper & Forest · market cap $1.5b. Down 35% from 52-week high of $56.80 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue -9% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating.
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Revenue contracting -9% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Down 35% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 3.1% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
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 BTG and SLVM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 36.1 points in favor of BTG. The widest single difference is Value, where BTG leads by 41.3 points.
- ValueBTG 92.1 · SLVM 50.8BTG +41.3
- GrowthBTG 50.0 · SLVM 14.7BTG +35.3
- QualityBTG 75.6 · SLVM 54.2BTG +21.4
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.