Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HMY scored 63.7, AU scored 71.7 — AU leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. AU's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but HMY's are as of June 2025 — a 12-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
HMY
Harmony Gold Mining Company Limited
Gold · Quality-Growth
63.7
$16.88 · $10.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
8.0
AU leads
AU
AngloGold Ashanti plc
Gold · Quality-Growth
71.7
$94.16 · $47.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestHMY6.2x
Fastest growthAU+70.8%
Strongest balance sheetHMY0.13
Highest qualityAU91 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueAU-64%
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)
HMY
stronger →← stronger
AU
89
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
80
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
81
AU is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HMY
AU
$956mC+
FCF
$4.5bB
+20.4%A-
Rev
+70.8%A
0.13A-
D/E
0.17B+
6.2xA
P/E
12.6xA-
0.03A
PEG
0.78A-
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
HMY
AU
57% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
64% below
~-7%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-9%/yr
+87%
1-yr DCF upside
+110%
+131%
5-yr DCF upside
+174%
+216%
10-yr DCF upside
+311%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
HMY
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
Foreign reporter (ZAR)
AU
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
The companies
HMYHarmony Gold Mining Company Limited
Gold · $16.88 · beta 0.79
Why now
Gold · market cap $10.6b. Down 35% from 52-week high of $26.06 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.03 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 3 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $22.19 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
Net margin 20% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 30% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Mining moat is reserve quality + extraction cost per unit — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the commodity cycle while marginal producers burn it.
Risk
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. Jurisdictional + permitting risk — mining and extraction operations concentrate exposure to political stability, royalty regimes, and environmental review timelines that can stall production for years.
AUAngloGold Ashanti plc
Gold · $94.16 · beta 0.74
Why now
Gold · market cap $47.6b. Down 27% from 52-week high of $129.14 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +71% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.78 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $117.50 (implying +25% upside).
Moat
Net margin 32% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 45% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 117% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
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
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.
Common questions
Is AU or HMY the better stock?
AU scores higher: AU 71.7, HMY 63.7 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.
How are AU and HMY 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.