AEM vs. CLF: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at AEM and CLF, comparing key factors like performance, valuation metrics, dividends, and financial strength. It’s built for investors or anyone curious to see how these two stocks match up.
Company Overview
AEM dwarfs CLF in market cap, clocking in at 58.46 billion USD—about 16.88 times the 3.46 billion USD of its counterpart.
CLF dances to a riskier tune, sporting a beta of 2.04, while AEM keeps it calmer at 0.53.
| Symbol | AEM | CLF |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Agnico Eagle Mines Limited | Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. |
| Country | CA | US |
| Sector | Basic Materials | Basic Materials |
| Industry | Gold | Steel |
| CEO | Mr. Ammar Al-Joundi M.B.A., P.Eng. | Mr. C. Lourenco Goncalves |
| Price | 115.63 USD | 7 USD |
| Market Cap | 58.46 billion USD | 3.46 billion USD |
| Beta | 0.527 | 2.039 |
| Exchange | NYSE | NYSE |
| IPO Date | June 1, 1972 | November 5, 1987 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of AEM and CLF over the past year by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each (starting one year ago).
Hover over the lines to see the investment’s value and total return (%) at specific dates.
Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.
Valuation Metrics Comparison
The section examines key financial ratios to assess the valuation of AEM and CLF based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- CLF shows a negative P/E of -2.93, highlighting a year of losses with no net profit generated. Meanwhile, AEM at 24.54 has sustained positive earnings, offering a more stable earnings foundation.
- AEM carries a negative Forward PEG of -4.30, hinting at analyst expectations of losses or shrinking earnings in the coming period—a potential warning for its future performance. On the flip side, CLF at 0.05 sidesteps this concern with a more favorable outlook.
- CLF has a negative Price-to-Free Cash Flow of -3.29, indicating it’s spent more cash than it’s brought in over the past year—a cash flow shortfall that raises questions about its operational sustainability. Meanwhile, AEM at 25.14 maintains a positive cash position.
| Symbol | AEM | CLF |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | 24.54 | -2.93 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | -4.30 | 0.05 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 6.54 | 0.19 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 2.68 | 0.55 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | 25.14 | -3.29 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | 11.32 | -174.71 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 6.55 | 0.59 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | 25.20 | -10.45 |
Dividend Comparison
AEM’s 1.38% yield offers steady income while retaining earnings for growth, unlike CLF, which pays none, reinvesting fully—likely in expansion or R&D—for investors eyeing future gains. This pits AEM’s balanced approach against CLF’s long-term focus.
| Symbol | AEM | CLF |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 1.38% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of AEM and CLF, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- At 0.64, CLF’s quick ratio falls below 0.8, where liquid assets, minus inventory, can’t keep up with short-term bills—possibly riding on cash flow. By contrast, AEM hits 1.20, covering its bases comfortably.
- CLF’s -2.82 sits under 1.5, where earnings hug interest costs too closely—a squeeze if income dips. Meanwhile, AEM at 45.23 has room to breathe.
| Symbol | AEM | CLF |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 2.37 | 2.13 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 1.20 | 0.64 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 0.06 | 1.22 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.04 | 0.36 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | 45.23 | -2.82 |