PortfoliosLab logo
LUG.TO vs. AEM
Performance
Risk-Adjusted Performance
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility
Financials

Correlation

The correlation between LUG.TO and AEM is 0.09, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Performance

LUG.TO vs. AEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lundin Gold Inc. (LUG.TO) and Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading data...

Key characteristics

Sharpe Ratio

LUG.TO:

5.22

AEM:

2.24

Sortino Ratio

LUG.TO:

4.44

AEM:

2.61

Omega Ratio

LUG.TO:

1.67

AEM:

1.36

Calmar Ratio

LUG.TO:

5.21

AEM:

4.24

Martin Ratio

LUG.TO:

42.43

AEM:

14.30

Ulcer Index

LUG.TO:

5.75%

AEM:

5.26%

Daily Std Dev

LUG.TO:

46.61%

AEM:

34.34%

Max Drawdown

LUG.TO:

-97.73%

AEM:

-90.33%

Current Drawdown

LUG.TO:

-1.29%

AEM:

-4.11%

Fundamentals

Market Cap

LUG.TO:

CA$15.65B

AEM:

$59.50B

EPS

LUG.TO:

CA$3.07

AEM:

$4.70

PE Ratio

LUG.TO:

21.07

AEM:

25.14

PS Ratio

LUG.TO:

11.83

AEM:

6.67

PB Ratio

LUG.TO:

8.66

AEM:

2.75

Total Revenue (TTM)

LUG.TO:

CA$1.32B

AEM:

$8.94B

Gross Profit (TTM)

LUG.TO:

CA$823.70M

AEM:

$4.30B

EBITDA (TTM)

LUG.TO:

CA$418.54M

AEM:

$5.17B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LUG.TO achieves a 120.63% return, which is significantly higher than AEM's 52.01% return. Over the past 10 years, LUG.TO has outperformed AEM with an annualized return of 33.98%, while AEM has yielded a comparatively lower 15.84% annualized return.


LUG.TO

YTD

120.63%

1M

19.01%

6M

109.44%

1Y

242.30%

3Y*

96.12%

5Y*

43.03%

10Y*

33.98%

AEM

YTD

52.01%

1M

0.69%

6M

40.83%

1Y

76.05%

3Y*

34.23%

5Y*

15.96%

10Y*

15.84%

*Annualized

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Lundin Gold Inc.

Agnico Eagle Mines Limited

Go deeper with the Portfolio Analysis tool — backtest performance, assess risk, compare to benchmarks, and more

Risk-Adjusted Performance

LUG.TO vs. AEM — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank

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

LUG.TO
The Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank of LUG.TO is 9999
Overall Rank
The Sharpe Ratio Rank of LUG.TO is 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
The Sortino Ratio Rank of LUG.TO is 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
The Omega Ratio Rank of LUG.TO is 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
The Calmar Ratio Rank of LUG.TO is 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
The Martin Ratio Rank of LUG.TO is 100100
Martin Ratio Rank

AEM
The Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank of AEM is 9595
Overall Rank
The Sharpe Ratio Rank of AEM is 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
The Sortino Ratio Rank of AEM is 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
The Omega Ratio Rank of AEM is 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
The Calmar Ratio Rank of AEM is 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
The Martin Ratio Rank of AEM is 9797
Martin Ratio Rank
The risk-adjusted ranks indicate the investment's position relative to the market. A rank closer to 100 signifies top-performing investments, while a rank closer to 0 might suggest underperformance, based on the selected ratio. The values are calculated based on the past 12 months of returns.

LUG.TO vs. AEM - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lundin Gold Inc. (LUG.TO) and Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM). 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.


The current LUG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 5.22, which is higher than the AEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LUG.TO and AEM, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading data...

Go to the full Sharpe Ratio tool to analyze any stock or portfolio. Customize time frames, set your own risk-free rate, and more

Dividends

LUG.TO vs. AEM - Dividend Comparison

LUG.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.55%, more than AEM's 1.70% yield.


TTM20242023202220212020201920182017201620152014
LUG.TO
Lundin Gold Inc.
2.55%2.71%3.33%1.97%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
AEM
Agnico Eagle Mines Limited
1.70%2.05%2.92%3.08%2.63%1.35%1.10%1.09%0.89%0.86%1.22%1.29%

Drawdowns

LUG.TO vs. AEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LUG.TO drawdown since its inception was -97.73%, which is greater than AEM's maximum drawdown of -90.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LUG.TO and AEM.


Loading data...

Go to the full Drawdowns tool for more analysis options, including inflation-adjusted drawdowns, and more

Volatility

LUG.TO vs. AEM - Volatility Comparison

Lundin Gold Inc. (LUG.TO) has a higher volatility of 28.13% compared to Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) at 14.37%. This indicates that LUG.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading data...

Financials

LUG.TO vs. AEM - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Lundin Gold Inc. and Agnico Eagle Mines Limited. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


0.00500.00M1.00B1.50B2.00B2.50B20212022202320242025
356.35M
2.47B
(LUG.TO) Total Revenue
(AEM) Total Revenue
Please note, different currencies. LUG.TO values in CAD, AEM values in USD

LUG.TO vs. AEM - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Lundin Gold Inc. and Agnico Eagle Mines Limited over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%20212022202320242025
65.5%
52.0%
(LUG.TO) Gross Margin
(AEM) Gross Margin
LUG.TO - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Lundin Gold Inc. reported a gross profit of 233.55M and revenue of 356.35M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 65.5%.

AEM - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited reported a gross profit of 1.28B and revenue of 2.47B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 52.0%.

LUG.TO - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Lundin Gold Inc. reported an operating income of 211.06M and revenue of 356.35M, resulting in an operating margin of 59.2%.

AEM - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited reported an operating income of 1.16B and revenue of 2.47B, resulting in an operating margin of 47.0%.

LUG.TO - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Lundin Gold Inc. reported a net income of 153.50M and revenue of 356.35M, resulting in a net margin of 43.1%.

AEM - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on May 2025, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited reported a net income of 814.73M and revenue of 2.47B, resulting in a net margin of 33.0%.