Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM) Stock Analysis
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.
▾ What's in the 39/100 risk score? (higher = riskier)
Contributions (weight × component score) sum to the total. This near-term score now includes fundamental health (leverage, FCF trend). See the Financial Health section for the full balance-sheet read.
How to read WPM (cyclical commodity producer)
A miner or energy producer earns whatever the commodity price is, so a single DCF swings with the cycle. Judge it against peers and where you think the commodity cycle is heading.
-
1
EV/Sales peer comparison ↓
How the price compares to similar producers is more meaningful than a through-cycle DCF.
-
2
Interactive calculator (test cycle assumptions) ↓
Flex the growth/discount inputs to see how sensitive the value is to where we are in the cycle.
Standard DCF doesn't fit WPM well — but that's expected for this kind of business. The EV/Sales Peer Comparison below uses the metrics actually used by analysts who value gold & silver mining. Reverse DCF + Football Field also work as cross-checks.
Miners, metals and energy producers earn whatever the commodity price is at the time. A discounted-cash-flow model leans on recent cash flow, so it swings with the cycle: the result is dominated by where we are in the commodity cycle rather than by durable business economics.
For this business type, lean on the EV/Sales peer comparison and Reverse-DCF below (how today's price compares to similar producers and what growth it implies), and weigh the commodity-price outlook. Treat the DCF number as a rough mid-cycle reference, not a buy/sell trigger.
How to read a company this small
WPM is too small and/or too volatile for the valuation lenses we use on larger, more stable companies. The numbers shown below should be taken as rough orientation only.
Growth percentages on tiny revenue bases (1000% going from $200K to $2M is not predictive). P/E and ROE swing wildly with small earnings changes. Peer comparisons fail because there often aren't comparable companies at this scale.
Start with the Reverse-DCF above — it backs out the growth the price is betting on; if that figure is "historically unprecedented," the price is running on hype, not fundamentals. Then the cash runway (can it fund itself to profitability before diluting you?). Then the raw Financials table and the 10-K on SEC EDGAR — at this scale, insider ownership and the share-count trend often matter more than any ratio.
Classified as Speculative Nano / Micro-cap (confidence 85%). Disagree? An admin can override via the post edit screen.
How does WPM stack up against its closest peers?
We take the 6 same-industry companies most similar to WPM (similar size) and check what investors are paying for each dollar of their revenue (or profits). If WPM is much more expensive on the same yardstick, that's a red flag — unless you have a specific reason it deserves a premium. For a leveraged business, FCF yield (in the table) is usually more reliable than EV/Sales, because revenue multiples ignore differences in margins and debt.
▾ What's "EV / Sales" in plain English?
EV (Enterprise Value) = market cap + total debt − cash. It's "what you'd pay to buy the entire company outright" — you pay the market cap to shareholders and take over their debt, but you keep their cash. EV is fairer than market cap alone because it includes the debt the new owner inherits.
EV / Sales = EV ÷ annual revenue. So "2.5×" means investors pay $2.50 of enterprise value per $1 of yearly sales. Higher = market is paying more per dollar of sales (usually because they expect future growth or fat margins).
p25 / median / p75 are the 25th, 50th (middle), and 75th percentile of the peers' multiples. Half the peers fall between p25 and p75. The median (p50) is the typical peer — that's the benchmark we compare to.
| EV / SalesEV / Sales — For every $1 of yearly revenue, this is how many dollars investors pay to own the whole business (including debt). Why it matters: Works for pre-profit growth companies where P/E and FCF don't apply. The most apples-to-apples cross-company multiple because it ignores accounting choices. Reference: 1–3x for mature companies · 4–10x for software/SaaS · 10–20x for hypergrowth · >20x is rare and demanding Full explanation → |
5.9x / 6.2x / 8.2x |
Bold middle number = median peer. Half the peers trade above it, half below. Computed over 6 same-industry peers; implausible multiples excluded.
⚠️ Important caveat: peer multiples only work if the peers are genuinely comparable. Always check the peer list below — if the auto-picker grabbed micro-caps or unrelated businesses, the comparison is noise. A medical-device giant priced against tiny biotech startups won't produce a useful signal.
▾ View peer list (8)
| Ticker | Company | Industry | Mcap | EV/Sales | EV/GP | EV/EBIT | FCF Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | BARRICK MINING CORP | Gold & Silver Mining | $73.2B | 4.6x | — | — | 1.6% |
| AEM | AGNICO EAGLE MINES LTD | Gold & Silver Mining | $100.2B | 8.4x | — | — | 1.0% |
| FNV | FRANCO NEVADA Corp | Gold & Silver Mining | $44.5B | — | 33.0x | — | — |
| GFI | GOLD FIELDS LTD | Gold & Silver Mining | $40.4B | 8.2x | — | — | 1.2% |
| NEM | NEWMONT Corp /DE/ | Gold & Silver Mining | $133.6B | 5.9x | — | — | 1.2% |
| SBSW | Sibanye Stillwater Ltd | Gold & Silver Mining | $35.5B | 6.2x | — | — | 4.1% |
| AU | AngloGold Ashanti PLC | Gold & Silver Mining ·fallback | $52.7B | 5.5x | 11.2x | — | 1.4% |
| KGC | KINROSS GOLD CORP | Gold & Silver Mining ·fallback | $35.0B | 5.1x | 9.6x | 10.9x | 1.8% |
Bankruptcy + quality screens
Cheap stocks can be cheap for a reason. These screens warn when a low valuation comes paired with structural fragility.
Why it matters: Cheap-looking stocks (low P/E or P/B) often have low Z-scores because the market knows the company is dying. Z-score warns you before you fall into a value trap.
Reference: > 3.0 = safe zone · 1.81–3.0 = grey zone · < 1.81 = distress zone
Full explanation →
Safe zone under the classic Altman thresholds — companies scoring here have historically gone bankrupt only rarely within ~2 years. A screening signal, not a guarantee.
The classic Z-score was calibrated on manufacturers. It is less reliable for asset-light or non-manufacturing businesses (broadcasters, media, software, services) and not applicable to banks, REITs, or insurers — for those the coefficients and the asset-turnover term distort the result. Read it as one screening input, not a verdict.
Why it matters: High score = fundamentals improving. Low score = deteriorating. Especially powerful for filtering cheap stocks: cheap + high F-score historically outperforms; cheap + low F-score is often a value trap.
Reference: 7–9 = strong · 4–6 = mediocre · 0–3 = weak
Full explanation →
▾ The checks — what passed, what didn't (and what we couldn't measure)
-
✓ Positive net incomeNet income $1,471.7M in FY2025.
-
✓ Positive operating cash flowOperating cash flow $1,905.0M (was $1,027.6M the prior year).
-
✓ Cash flow backs up reported profitOperating cash flow $1,905.0M vs net income $1,471.7M.
-
✓ Return on assets improvingReturn on assets 16.1% vs 7.1% a year ago.
-
✓ Debt load (vs assets)The filing reports no interest-bearing debt in either year (total assets $9,125.8M).
-
✗ Short-term liquidity (current ratio)Current ratio 7.78x vs 28.07x a year ago.Why this matters: The current ratio compares assets it can turn to cash within a year against bills due within a year. Below 1.0 means it may struggle to cover near-term obligations.
-
✓ Share count (dilution)Share count held roughly flat (453.5M → 453.9M year-over-year).
-
✓ Pricing power (gross margin)Gross margin 72.2% vs 62.5% a year ago.
-
✓ Sales per asset (asset turnover)Asset turnover 0.25x vs 0.17x a year ago.
Missing data is never counted as a pass or a fail — it's shown as n/a and excluded from the denominator. Each check compares the company against its own prior year.
What if you assume different inputs?
Here's where we land — and what happens if you change the assumptions. Drag the sliders to set your own Discount RateDiscount Rate — The annual return you demand for taking single-stock risk instead of buying a safe Treasury or index fund.
Why it matters: Higher discount rate = stricter valuation (a stock has to produce more cash to be worth holding). Lower = more generous.
Reference: 8–12% is standard · 9–10% matches S&P 500 historical return · Below 7% is illogical for single-stock risk
Full explanation → (the annual return you demand for single-stock risk) and terminal growth; the value updates live so you can see whether the stock looks cheaper or richer. The discount rate starts at 10.0%, the figure our model used for WPM. Open Advanced to also change beta, growth and the rate path.
Note: no headline intrinsic value is published for this stock (the valuation is held for a data-quality reason — see the notes above). The calculator below is a what-if tool: the values it produces are your assumptions played out, not our estimate.
A full intrinsic value isn't shown for WPM because the valuation is currently held for a data-quality reason (see the guardrail notes above). The reverse-DCF reading still works — it needs only the price and cash flow — but we won't publish a forward value until the underlying data passes our checks.
—
⚙ Advanced — tinker with every input (beta, growth, rate path, margin → full intrinsic value)
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. The market appears to be paying for the company's strong revenue growth of 17.8%/yr over 4 years and expanding gross margins from 54.8% to 72.2%. The biggest risk to our model's base assumptions is that normalized cash flow declines, given that free cash flowFree Cash Flow (FCF) — Operating cash flow minus capital spending: cash left after a company covers operating costs, taxes and interest and reinvests in the business — but BEFORE repaying debt principal or paying dividends. The cash actually available to investors.
Why it matters: A company can show big profits on paper while burning through cash. FCF is what actually fills the bank account.
Reference: Healthy mature businesses convert 8–15% of revenue into FCF · Growth companies often negative
Full explanation → after stock comp was $599.8 million, which is significantly lower than operating cash flow, suggesting substantial capital expenditure needs.
As of 3 days ago
Anatomy of a share
What you're buying per share. Bars are at the same scale so you can see the relative size of revenue, costs, cash flow, and debt — not just read them in a table.
What's free cash flow / what do these mean?
Revenue per share — how much the business earns from customers, divided by the number of shares outstanding. Top of the income statement.
Earnings per share — profit left after operating costs, interest, and taxes, per share. Two versions appear on this page and are not interchangeable: GAAP diluted EPS uses the company's weighted-average diluted share count during the reporting period (this is the "earnings" in "price-to-earnings"); net income per current share divides annual net income by today's share count. They differ whenever the share count has changed.
Owner-earnings free cash flow per share — the cash the business produces for shareholders. Savng's owner-earnings FCF subtracts capital expenditures and stock-based compensation from operating cash flow (SBC is a real dilution cost even though it's non-cash). This is deliberately more conservative than "standard" FCF, which subtracts only capital expenditures — so our figure is lower than the headline FCF you'll see elsewhere. FCF funds dividends, buybacks, debt repayment, and acquisitions; a company can report positive earnings yet negative FCF.
Debt per share — total interest-bearing borrowings divided by shares. High debt-per-share next to thin FCF-per-share is a fragility signal.
The trend, in plain numbers (FY2024 → FY2025, latest reported)
Straight from the financial statements — no model, no opinion. For a small or unprofitable company, the direction of these numbers usually tells you more than any single valuation.
- Revenue grew +80% to $2.31B.
- Free cash flow rose to $599.8M.
- Gross margin improved to 72% (+10 pts).
- Net income grew +178% to $1.47B.
Nothing was clearly worsening year-over-year.
Management & Leadership
Limited executive data available. The names of current CEO and key executives are not available from the provided data. This information would typically be sourced from public filings or company websites.
What They Make
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. is a streaming company that acquires precious metals production from mining companies. They generate revenue by selling these metals, with mining companies being their primary counterparties.
End Markets
Revenue Drivers
Why Is It Priced Like This?
Why Customers Pay
What we use instead: earnings (P/E, EV/EBIT), book value (P/B), dividend yield & payout — computed from the figures this company does report, shown in the sections below. Those numbers are unaffected by the missing cash-flow data.
The market prices WPM at a premium of +1331% to the model's intrinsic valueIntrinsic Value — Our DCF model's estimate of what each share is mathematically worth based on projected cash flows.
Why it matters: Compare to current price. Below IV = potentially undervalued. Above IV = priced for growth that must actually happen.
Reference: Model-derived; quality depends on data and assumptions.
Full explanation →, implying a 62.0% annual per-share cash-flow growth. This optimism is likely driven by the company's strong revenue growth of 17.8%/yr over 4 years and expanding gross margins from 54.8% to 72.2%. The market may also be assigning value to the optionality of future discoveries or expansions at the mines from which WPM holds streams, which is not in the model.
Business Model & Valuation
How They Make Money
Normalized FCF
Cyclical/commodity sector (Gold & Silver Mining): normalized FCF uses 5-year median to smooth peak/trough distortions.
Show advanced inputs
| Revenue Growth | 17.8% |
| Eps Growth | 17.9% |
| Historical Fcf Growth | 8.2% |
| Sector Default | 5.0% |
| Sector Default Source | Basic Materials sector default |
| Best Estimate | 14.0% |
| Method | blend(70% revenue_cagr, 30% sector) |
| Growth Basis | total |
What this model does NOT do: this is a consolidated owner-earnings FCF model. Standalone segment assumptions: none. It does not project production volumes, realized commodity prices and unit cash costs independently; their combined effect is embedded in the historical revenue and cash-flow trend the model extrapolates. The calculator above can only approximate a segment's impact through the single consolidated growth rate — it cannot model any one line separately. For a true segment-level view, build a separate model from the company's segment disclosures.
Maturity & Competitive Position
Geography & Markets
Market Signals
These are timing signals, not value signals — they describe the stock's recent price behavior, not what the business is worth. Use them for the "the thesis looks good, but is now the moment?" question. Each tile below explains what it's saying.
Why it matters: Short-term contrarian indicator. Extreme readings often precede mean reversion, though not always.
Reference: 30–70 normal · >70 overbought · <30 oversold
Full explanation → (14)59.2NeutralMomentum is balanced — neither overbought nor oversold.
Why it matters: When the fast line crosses above the slow line, short-term momentum is turning up; below, turning down. A timing cue, not a value signal.
Reference: Line above signal = bullish momentum · below = bearish
Full explanation →BearishLine below signalThe fast trend is below the slow trend — short-term momentum is currently downward.
Technicals describe price, not the business. A great company can have a "bearish" tape (a buying chance) and a weak one a "bullish" tape (a trap). Pair these with the valuation and health sections above.
QUALITY
Data Quality & Risk Flags (7 notes — click to expand/collapse)
Guardrail Notes (7)
- Cyclical sector: using normalized cash flow (median OCF minus estimated maintenance capex).
- Median OCF: $845.14M, est. maintenance capex: $488.30M, normalized SBC: $16.31M, normalized owner-earnings FCF: $340.54M.
- Growth capped at 8.0%/yr for this normalized-cyclical model (the blended estimate was 14%). Through-cycle cash flow of a cyclical business does not compound at peak-year rates, so this route caps stage-1 growth at 8% by rule.
- Price is far above the model output - market may be pricing optionality, narrative catalysts, or margin expansion beyond what trailing cash flows support.
- Cyclical commodity producer: price is far above our modelled value. FCF-DCF structurally understates capital-intensive miners/energy — use the EV/Sales peer lens and the commodity-price outlook, not this single number.
- Unusually high net margin (64% of revenue) — plausible for royalty/streaming-style economics, but verify the revenue concept covers the consolidated business.
- Extreme valuation gap (P/IV withheld — see the note above): result may be dominated by model assumptions, share count issues, or sector-specific dynamics. Treat as low confidence.
FINANCIALS
Financial Statements (5-year tables — click to expand)
From Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.'s SEC filings (EDGAR).
Income (5yr)
| Year | Revenue | Net Income | EPS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 2.3B | 1.5B | $3.24 |
| 2024 | 1.3B | 529.1M | $1.17 |
| 2023 | 1.0B | 537.6M | $1.19 |
| 2022 | 1.1B | 669.1M | $1.48 |
| 2021 | 1.2B | 754.9M | $1.67 |
Cash Flow (5yr)
CapEx is approximated. This filer reports capital expenditure under a company-specific tag our parser cannot read, so the CapEx column uses total investing outflow instead. That includes acquisitions and investment purchases, so the free cash flow shown is a conservative (lower-bound) figure in years with large deals.
| Year | Operating CF | Investing outflow (capex proxy) | − SBC | Free Cash Flow |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 1.9B | 1.3B | 26.0M | 599.8M |
| 2024 | 1.0B | 488.3M | 16.6M | 522.7M |
| 2023 | 750.8M | 646.6M | 16.3M | 87.9M |
| 2022 | 743.4M | 44.3M | 14.2M | 684.9M |
| 2021 | 845.1M | 404.2M | — | 438.0M |
How we define FCF: operating cash flow − capital expenditure − stock-based compensation (owner-earnings basis — SBC is a real cost to shareholders even though it's non-cash). Latest year: 1.9B − 1.3B − 26.0M (stock-based comp) = 599.8M. This is the same owner-earnings FCF definition the valuation model uses, though the DCF's starting value is a mid-cycle estimate (median operating cash flow less estimated maintenance capex and stock compensation — by design NOT the table's FCF, which deducts every year's full capex), not this single year.
Balance Sheet
| Total Assets | 9.1B |
| Total Liabilities | 435.3M |
| Equity | 8.7B |
Similar companies worth a look
Same sector and industry, similar fundamentals shape. Verify everything yourself — this list is computed mechanically and does not reflect our judgment about whether any of these are a good investment.