COMPARE · Data as of August 14, 2026
FSM vs KGC
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FSM scored 71.5, KGC scored 69.5 — FSM leads.
Compare another set
FSM
Fortuna Mining Corp.
71.5
$10.67 · $3.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
2.0
FSM leads
KGC
Kinross Gold Corporation
69.5
$27.31 · $32.4B
fundamentals as of
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
FSM
stronger →← stronger
KGC
82
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
89
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
74
FSM and KGC split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FSM
KGC
$613mC+
FCF
$2.6bB
+39.8%A
Rev
+36.9%A
0.13A-
D/E
0.08A-
9.0xA
P/E
10.4xA-
0.40A
PEG
1.12B+
Winner per row is the stronger grade in our model; a tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
FSM
KGC
60% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
5% below
~-11%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~6%/yr
+98%
1-yr DCF upside
-5%
+148%
5-yr DCF upside
+6%
+235%
10-yr DCF upside
+22%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
FSM
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
KGC
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
- Cyclical growth
The companies
FSMFortuna Mining Corp.
Why now
Gold · market cap $3.2b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $13.85 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +40% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.40 — 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.
KGCKinross Gold Corporation
Why now
Gold · market cap $32.4b. Down 30% from 52-week high of $39.11 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +37% — in hypergrowth territory. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $35.93 (implying +32% upside).
Moat
Net margin 35% 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. FCF converts 104% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 30% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. 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. Reserve-replacement treadmill — every barrel or ounce extracted has to be replaced through exploration or acquisition; underspending on replacement reserves shows up in production declines 2-3 years out.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
FSM leads KGC by 2 points (71.5 to 69.5), its sharpest advantage coming in PEG (grade A). A contrarian could still prefer KGC, which trades about 5% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — FSM screens as value, KGC screens as growth — 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 FSM and KGC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 2.0 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.
- ValueFSM 88.9 · KGC 74.0FSM +14.9
- QualityFSM 82.2 · KGC 90.7KGC +8.5
- GrowthFSM 50.0 · KGC 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.