Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FNV scored 57.9, AYA scored 70.4 — AYA leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. AYA's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but FNV'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.
FNV
Franco-Nevada Corporation
Gold · Quality-Growth
57.9
$244.85 · $47.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
12.5
AYA leads
AYA
Aya Gold & Silver Inc.
Silver · Quality-Growth
70.4
$27.42 · $3.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestFNV32.0x
Fastest growthAYA+416.7%
Strongest balance sheetFNV0.00
Highest qualityAYA93 / 100
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)
FNV
stronger →← stronger
AYA
81
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
93
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
48
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
75
AYA is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FNV
AYA
$1.5bC+
FCF
$88mC-
+63.7%A
Rev
+416.7%A
0.00A
D/E
0.17B+
32.0xC
P/E
35.6xC
2.38C
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
FNV
AYA
65% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
199% above
~22%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~47%/yr
-46%
1-yr DCF upside
-74%
-39%
5-yr DCF upside
-67%
-27%
10-yr DCF upside
-53%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
FNV
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
AYA
Why this score
Cyclical growth
Short track record
The companies
FNVFranco-Nevada Corporation
Gold · $244.85 · beta 0.94
Why now
Gold · market cap $47.2b. 14% off the 52-week high of $285.67. Revenue growing +64% — in hypergrowth territory. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $286.97 (implying +17% upside).
Moat
Net margin 61% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 15% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 134% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trailing P/E 32x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 25.9x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. Commodity exposure — earnings power tracks the price of the underlying commodity, not management execution. A 15-20% move in the commodity reprices the equity well before fundamentals catch up.
AYAAya Gold & Silver Inc.
Silver · $27.42 · beta 1.68
Why now
Silver · market cap $3.9b. 11% off the 52-week high of $30.67. 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 1.68 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 36x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 11.5x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
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 FNV and AYA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 12.5 points in favor of AYA. The widest single difference is Value, where AYA leads by 27.8 points.
ValueFNV 47.6 · AYA 75.4AYA +27.8
QualityFNV 81.5 · AYA 92.6AYA +11.1
GrowthFNV 50.0 · AYA 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 AYA or FNV the better stock?
AYA scores higher: AYA 70.4, FNV 57.9 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 AYA and FNV differ most?
The widest gap is value, where AYA leads by 28 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. AYA also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are AYA and FNV 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.