GFI vs. KGC

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Gold Fields Limited (GFI) and Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC).

Performance

GFI vs. KGC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gold Fields Limited (GFI) and Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GFI vs. KGC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GFI Gold Fields Limited	13.45%	240.42%	-6.27%	44.90%	-2.61%	23.33%	43.02%	89.47%	-16.75%	45.29%
KGC Kinross Gold Corporation	13.85%	206.11%	55.63%	51.83%	-27.59%	-19.00%	56.04%	46.30%	-25.00%	38.91%

Fundamentals

Market Cap GFI : $43.05B KGC : $38.70B
EPS GFI : $5.39 KGC : $1.97
PE Ratio GFI : 8.93 KGC : 16.29
PEG Ratio GFI : 0.14 KGC : 0.22
PS Ratio GFI : 3.08 KGC : 5.53
PB Ratio GFI : 5.10 KGC : 4.52
Total Revenue (TTM) GFI : $13.98B KGC : $7.06B
Gross Profit (TTM) GFI : $7.34B KGC : $3.48B
EBITDA (TTM) GFI : $8.04B KGC : $4.26B

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with GFI having a 13.45% return and KGC slightly higher at 13.85%. Over the past 10 years, GFI has outperformed KGC with an annualized return of 31.70%, while KGC has yielded a comparatively lower 26.22% annualized return.

GFI

• 1D: 6.01%
• 1M: -14.48%
• YTD: 13.45%
• 6M: 18.67%
• 1Y: 119.94%
• 3Y*: 58.55%
• 5Y*: 41.26%
• 10Y*: 31.70%

KGC

• 1D: 4.91%
• 1M: -12.86%
• YTD: 13.85%
• 6M: 26.14%
• 1Y: 155.70%
• 3Y*: 92.13%
• 5Y*: 38.11%
• 10Y*: 26.22%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

GFI vs. KGC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

GFI

GFI Risk / Return Rank: 87
GFI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
GFI Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
GFI Omega Ratio Rank: 83
GFI Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
GFI Martin Ratio Rank: 91

KGC

KGC Risk / Return Rank: 94
KGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
KGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
KGC Omega Ratio Rank: 93
KGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
KGC Martin Ratio Rank: 96

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

GFI vs. KGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gold Fields Limited (GFI) and Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	GFI	KGC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.98	3.11	-1.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.31	3.04	-0.73
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.45	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.66	5.15	-1.49
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.55	18.12	-6.58
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GFI vs. KGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GFI Sharpe Ratio is 1.98, which is lower than the KGC Sharpe Ratio of 3.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GFI and KGC, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GFI	KGC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.98	3.11	-1.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80	0.88	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.55	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.15	0.09	+0.07

Correlation

The correlation between GFI and KGC is 0.70, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

GFI vs. KGC - Dividend Comparison

GFI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.83%, more than KGC's 0.42% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GFI Gold Fields Limited	3.83%	1.77%	2.94%	2.87%	3.40%	3.24%	1.72%	0.81%	1.61%	1.41%	1.35%	0.60%
KGC Kinross Gold Corporation	0.42%	0.44%	1.29%	1.98%	2.93%	2.69%	0.82%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

GFI vs. KGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GFI drawdown since its inception was -88.05%, smaller than the maximum KGC drawdown of -96.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFI and KGC.

Drawdown Indicators

	GFI	KGC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.05%	-96.00%	+7.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.63%	-30.20%	-4.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-56.22%	-61.44%	+5.22%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-63.09%	-67.75%	+4.66%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.47%	-15.79%	-3.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-44.43%	-57.84%	+13.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.97%	8.58%	+2.39%

Volatility

GFI vs. KGC - Volatility Comparison

Gold Fields Limited (GFI) has a higher volatility of 19.95% compared to Kinross Gold Corporation (KGC) at 16.80%. This indicates that GFI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GFI	KGC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.95%	16.80%	+3.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	48.31%	41.14%	+7.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	61.00%	50.45%	+10.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	51.62%	43.55%	+8.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	55.33%	47.67%	+7.66%

Financials

GFI vs. KGC - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Gold Fields Limited and Kinross Gold Corporation over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

GFI - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Gold Fields Limited reported a gross profit of 3.00B and revenue of 5.29B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 56.7%.

KGC - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Kinross Gold Corporation reported a gross profit of 1.08B and revenue of 2.05B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 52.4%.

GFI - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Gold Fields Limited reported an operating income of 2.71B and revenue of 5.29B, resulting in an operating margin of 51.3%.

KGC - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Kinross Gold Corporation reported an operating income of 985.01M and revenue of 2.05B, resulting in an operating margin of 48.0%.

GFI - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Gold Fields Limited reported a net income of 2.55B and revenue of 5.29B, resulting in a net margin of 48.2%.

KGC - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Kinross Gold Corporation reported a net income of 920.43M and revenue of 2.05B, resulting in a net margin of 44.8%.