COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
FSM vs SLVM
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FSM scored 70.2, SLVM scored 34.3 — FSM leads.
Compare another set
FSM
Fortuna Mining Corp.
70.2
$12.07 · $3.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
35.9
FSM leads
SLVM
Sylvamo Corp
34.3
$36.79 · $1.5B
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestFSM10.1x
- Fastest growthFSM+39.8%
- 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)
FSM
stronger →← stronger
SLVM
82
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
54
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
15
84
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
51
FSM is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FSM
SLVM
$613mC+
FCF
$10mC-
+39.8%A
Rev
-9.3%D
0.13A-
D/E
0.88B
10.1xA
P/E
15.2xB+
0.44A
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
FSM
SLVM
55% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
913% above
~-7%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~60%/yr
+75%
1-yr DCF upside
-89%
+121%
5-yr DCF upside
-90%
+201%
10-yr DCF upside
-92%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
FSM
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
SLVM
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
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.
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 FSM and SLVM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 35.9 points in favor of FSM. The widest single difference is Growth, where FSM leads by 35.3 points.
- GrowthFSM 50.0 · SLVM 14.7FSM +35.3
- ValueFSM 83.9 · SLVM 50.8FSM +33.1
- QualityFSM 82.5 · SLVM 54.2FSM +28.3
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.