COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
ERO vs FSM
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ERO scored 63.5, FSM scored 70.2 — FSM leads.
Compare another set
ERO
Ero Copper Corp.
63.5
$39.42 · $4.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.7
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 growthERO+67.1%
- Strongest balance sheetFSM0.13
- Highest qualityFSM82 / 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)
ERO
stronger →← stronger
FSM
76
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
82
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
67
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
84
FSM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ERO
FSM
$132mC
FCF
$613mC+
+67.1%A
Rev
+39.8%A
0.47B
D/E
0.13A-
13.4xA-
P/E
10.1xA
0.64A-
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
ERO
FSM
119% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
55% below
~34%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-7%/yr
-62%
1-yr DCF upside
+75%
-54%
5-yr DCF upside
+121%
-40%
10-yr DCF upside
+201%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ERO
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
FSM
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
The companies
EROEro Copper Corp.
Why now
Copper · market cap $4.1b. Trading near 52-week high of $39.80 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +67% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.64 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 3 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $35.87 (implying -9% upside).
Moat
Net margin 34% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 28% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Beta 1.59 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.
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
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 ERO and FSM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.7 points in favor of FSM. The widest single difference is Value, where FSM leads by 16.6 points.
- ValueERO 67.3 · FSM 83.9FSM +16.6
- QualityERO 76.1 · FSM 82.5FSM +6.4
- GrowthERO 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.