Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicAt 21.7x earnings — a 41% discount to the sector average of 36.7x — AEM is in the lower valuation range. Financial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 9/9, Altman Z 7.2 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency and profitability profile present a compelling case for superior economic quality. The firm generates returns on invested capital at 16.6%, significantly outpacing the estimated cost of equity to yield an ROIC-WACC spread of +8.0%. This high-quality earnings generation is driven primarily by expansive net margins of 37.5% rather than operational leverage or asset turnover, as evidenced by a DuPont decomposition where margin expansion outweighs the relatively low asset turnover of 0.35x and moderate equity multiplier of 1.39x resulting in an ROE of 18.0%. Fundamental integrity is further underscored by perfect Piotroski F-Score of 9/9, indicating robust balance sheet strength and consistent earnings growth, while the Altman Z-Score of 7.2 places the entity well within safe territory regarding bankruptcy risk; conversely, a Beneish M-Score of -2.69 suggests management incentives are low for manipulating reported income.
Valuation metrics suggest the market is pricing in aggressive future expectations that may exceed historical norms or sector averages given the current P/E ratio of 21.7x relative to such strong fundamentals. While the revenue growth trajectory of 43.7% YoY supports a high multiple, the DCF model implies a fair value of $114, which serves as a critical anchor for assessing whether the current price reflects sustainable long-term cash flows or speculative premiums. The divergence between the exceptional fundamental metrics and the valuation level requires careful calibration against implied growth assumptions embedded in the DCF to determine if the stock is fairly valued or potentially overextended relative to its intrinsic worth.
The convergence of flawless Piotroski scoring, low earnings manipulation risk indicated by the negative Beneish M-Score, and a substantial ROIC-WACC spread creates a favorable risk-reward asymmetry typical of high-conviction long-term holdings. However, investors must weigh this fundamental strength against the sensitivity of the valuation to any deviation in the projected growth rates used in the DCF analysis, as even minor adjustments could materially impact the implied fair value relative to current market prices.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 6.6% | 8.6% | 10.6% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $141 | $101 | $80 |
| 3% | $171 | $114 | $87 |
| 4% | $225 | $132 | $95 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=8.6%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $114 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Valuation Context
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.
DuPont Analysis — ROE Decomposition
Breaking down Return on Equity to see how the company generates its ROE — efficiency, margins, or leverage.
Balance Sheet Health
Earnings Surprise History
EPS estimates vs actuals for the most recent reported quarters. Source: yfinance.
Underwater (Drawdown from Peak)
How far below the all-time high the price has been over time. Deeper = more pain for holders.
Rolling 60-Day Beta vs S&P 500 (VOO)
How the stock's sensitivity to market moves changes over time. β > 1 = more volatile than the market.
Fundamentals
Passive Flow Attribution
ETF Draft EffectWhen investors buy or sell ETFs like VSGX or VEA, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell AEM shares regardless of Agnico Eagle Mines Limited's individual fundamentals. We estimate $2.6B of passive capital is structurally linked to AEM through 7 tracked ETFs. Index rebalances and ETF creation/redemption cycles can create noticeable volume spikes unrelated to company news.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 7 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in Agnico Eagle Mines Limited to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If Agnico Eagle Mines Limited (AEM) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (2330) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with AEM. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 7 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
AEM Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest AEM Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 7 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
AEM Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does Agnico Eagle Mines Limited convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
Agnico Eagle Mines Limited converts 51% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 8.0% confirms that reinvested capital creates shareholder value.
Capital efficiency = Free Cash Flow ÷ EBITDA. Reinvestment = (EBITDA − FCF) ÷ EBITDA. Metrics from latest annual filings. Not investment advice.
Fails-to-Deliver (FTD) History
SEC-reported settlement failures. Elevated FTDs can indicate high short-selling pressure, operational settlement issues, or naked shorting activity.
| Date | Failed Shares | Close Price | Notional Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 468 | $195.97 | $91,713.96 |
| 2026-05-13 | 23,644 | $197.05 | $4.7M |
| 2026-05-11 | 426 | $193.21 | $82,307.46 |
| 2026-05-05 | 128 | $179.93 | $23,031.04 |
| 2026-04-28 | 429 | $198.13 | $84,997.77 |
| 2026-04-27 | 7,869 | $200.23 | $1.6M |
| 2026-04-21 | 29,200 | $216.39 | $6.3M |
| 2026-04-20 | 1,548 | $220.10 | $340,714.8 |
| 2026-04-17 | 6,322 | $214.93 | $1.4M |
| 2026-04-16 | 1,492 | $214.40 | $319,884.8 |
| 2026-04-15 | 52 | $219.94 | $11,436.88 |
| 2026-04-14 | 47 | $217.38 | $10,216.86 |
| 2026-04-13 | 3,448 | $218.75 | $754,250 |
| 2026-04-10 | 1,190 | $216.44 | $257,563.6 |
| 2026-04-09 | 736 | $215.59 | $158,674.24 |
| 2026-04-07 | 1,216 | $208.50 | $253,536 |
| 2026-04-06 | 23,304 | $208.54 | $4.9M |
| 2026-04-01 | 2 | $202.98 | $405.96 |
| 2026-03-31 | 2 | $191.86 | $383.72 |
| 2026-03-30 | 20,441 | $193.40 | $4.0M |
| 2026-03-27 | 2 | $187.56 | $375.12 |
| 2026-03-26 | 18 | $192.07 | $3,457.26 |
| 2026-03-25 | 2,135 | $183.49 | $391,751.15 |
| 2026-03-23 | 477 | $179.13 | $85,445.01 |
| 2026-03-19 | 315 | $196.09 | $61,768.35 |
| 2026-03-18 | 5 | $209.45 | $1,047.25 |
| 2026-03-17 | 2,460 | $210.16 | $516,993.6 |
| 2026-03-16 | 432 | $207.54 | $89,657.28 |
| 2026-03-13 | 544 | $218.24 | $118,722.56 |
| 2026-03-11 | 55 | $226.94 | $12,481.7 |
Source: SEC Regulation SHO FTD data. Data is reported with a ~30 day delay. High FTD quantities relative to average daily volume may indicate settlement stress.
Compare AEM to Peers
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: N/A.
SecuritiesDB provides programmatic data aggregation for informational purposes only. None of the metrics, summaries, or algorithmic flags constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any security.