Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. TX scored 33.2, AYA scored 70.4 — AYA leads.
Compare another set
TX
Ternium SA
Metals & Mining · Quality-Growth
33.2
$58.18 · $11.1B
Score gap
37.2
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
CheapestTX15.8x
Fastest growthAYA+416.7%
Strongest balance sheetTX0.22
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)
TX
stronger →← stronger
AYA
47
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
93
15
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
53
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
75
AYA is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
TX
AYA
—
FCF
$88mC-
-1.4%D+
Rev
+416.7%A
0.22A-
D/E
0.17B+
15.8xB+
P/E
35.6xC
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
TX
AYA
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
199% above
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~47%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
-74%
—
5-yr DCF upside
-67%
—
10-yr DCF upside
-53%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
TX
Why this score
Raising its dividend
AYA
Why this score
Cyclical growth
Short track record
The companies
TXTernium SA
Metals & Mining · $58.18 · beta 1.07
Why now
Metals & Mining · market cap $11.1b. Trading near 52-week high of $59.32 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety.
Moat
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
Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Net margin 4.4% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 6% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
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 TX and AYA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 37.2 points in favor of AYA. The widest single difference is Quality, where AYA leads by 45.7 points.
QualityTX 46.9 · AYA 92.6AYA +45.7
GrowthTX 14.7 · AYA 50.0AYA +35.3
ValueTX 52.8 · AYA 75.4AYA +22.6
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 TX the better stock?
AYA scores higher: AYA 70.4, TX 33.2 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 TX differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where AYA leads by 46 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. AYA leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are AYA and TX 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.