Skip to main content
Homepage
OLDER Analysis Report
Aug 2, 2026
39 days ago · 100% complete
This report is 39 days old — newer filings and price moves since then are not reflected.
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Hecla Mining Company (HL) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-09-11): Designation Low · Gem Score -49 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality -11 · Value -75 · Sentiment 58 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $10.77 vs $14.12 at analysis

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

Hecla Mining Company

HL NYSE
Basic Materials · Other Precious Metals & Mining
Coeur d'Alene, ID 83815-9408, United States hecla.com Updated Aug 2, 2:03pm
Price
$14.12
Market Cap
$9.5B
Employees
1,865
Beta
1.29
Avg Volume
39,718,070
Last Dividend
$0.02
CEO
Mr. Robert L. Krcmarov

Hecla Mining Company is a precious and base metals producer focused primarily on silver, gold, zinc, and lead. The company operates a portfolio of underground mines and related assets, supplying concentrates and unrefined dore containing silver and gold to custom smelters, metal traders, and third-party processors. Its key operating segments include Greens Creek, Lucky Friday, Keno Hill, and Casa Berardi, which collectively provide geographic and asset diversification across North America. Hecla Mining Company plays a significant role in the materials sector by supporting industrial demand for silver and base metals, as well as serving the jewelry and investment-grade metals markets. The company’s operations are concentrated in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, with the majority of revenue derived from U.S. activities. Founded in 1891 and headquartered in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, Hecla Mining Company is recognized as a major participant in the U.S. silver mining industry today.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 2, 2026 2:13pm
Price Overview
Price at report time
$14.12
as of Aug 2, 2:23pm (39d ago)
Change · Aug 2
-0.81 (-5.43%)
Day Range
$13.94 – $14.73
52-Week Range
$5.62 – $34.17
50-Day MA
$15.71
200-Day MA
$18.31
Volume
26,504,100.00
Right now · live
Log in to get the live feed
Members see the real-time price and the move since this report (over 39d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 670,614,239.00
Float 661,986,435.00
Free Float 98.7%
High free float — 98.7% of shares trade freely, ~1.3% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 2:28pm (39d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 2:27pm (39d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 2, 2026 2:11pm
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
28.82
Stock Price: $14.12
EPS (Diluted): 0.49
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
3.57
Stock Price: $14.12
Total Equity: $2.59B
Shares: 655,768,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
13.56
Market Cap: $9.47B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $241.56M
EBITDA: $680.37M
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$9.2B
Market Cap: $9.47B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $241.56M
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
43.7%
Gross Profit: $622.20M
Revenue: $1.42B
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
36.2%
Operating Income: $514.80M
Revenue: $1.42B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
22.6%
Net Income: $321.71M
Revenue: $1.42B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
12.4%
Net Income: $321.71M
Total Equity: $2.59B
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
14.7%
Operating Income: $514.80M
Tax Rate: 32.9%
Equity: $2.59B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $241.56M
Zero debt — invested capital = equity minus cash (very efficient)
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
2.72
Current Assets: $629.34M
Current Liabilities: $231.56M
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.00
Short-Term Debt: $0.00
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $2.59B
Zero debt — this company carries no debt obligations. Strongest possible score.
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$2.17
Revenue: $1.42B
Shares: 655,768,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$3.95
Total Equity: $2.59B
Shares: 655,768,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$0.47
Operating CF: $562.64M
CapEx: -$252.39M
Shares: 655,768,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
0.1%
Last Dividend: $0.02
Stock Price: $14.12
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
3.2%
Dividends Paid: -$10.38M
Net Income: $321.71M
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 2, 2026 2:11pm
Compares HL against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 2:27pm (39d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $807.5M $718.9M $720.2M $929.9M $1.4B
Cost of Revenue $589.7M $602.7M $607.3M $731.7M $800.8M
Gross Profit $217.8M $116.2M $112.9M $198.2M $622.2M
Operating Expenses $134.4M $103.7M $157.6M $91.9M $107.4M
Operating Income $83.4M $12.4M -$44.7M $106.3M $514.8M
Net Income $35.1M -$37.3M -$84.2M $35.8M $321.7M
EBITDA $256.1M $157.6M $119.0M $296.7M $680.4M
EPS $0.06 $0.07 $-0.14 $0.06 $0.49
EPS (Diluted) $0.06 $0.07 $-0.14 $0.06 $0.49
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 2:03pm (39d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $210.0M $104.7M $106.4M $26.9M $241.6M
Total Current Assets $341.6M $267.7M $260.3M $214.2M $629.3M
Total Assets $2.7B $2.9B $3.0B $3.0B $3.6B
Current Liabilities $160.4M $178.5M $157.5M $197.8M $231.6M
Long-Term Debt
Total Liabilities $968.0M $948.2M $1.0B $941.5M $969.0M
Total Equity $1.8B $2.0B $2.0B $2.0B $2.6B
Retained Earnings -$353.7M -$403.9M -$503.9M -$493.5M -$182.1M
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 2:27pm (39d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow $220.3M $89.9M $75.5M $218.3M $562.6M
Capital Expenditure -$109.0M -$149.4M -$223.9M -$214.5M -$252.4M
Free Cash Flow $111.3M -$59.5M -$148.4M $3.8M $310.2M
Acquisitions (net) $0 $9.0M $228,000 $0 $0
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) $0 $0 $128.0M -$105.0M -$274.2M
Dividends Paid -$20.7M -$12.9M -$15.7M -$25.3M -$10.4M
Stock Buybacks -$4.5M -$3.7M -$2.0M -$1.2M $-885,000
Net Change in Cash $80.2M -$105.2M $1.6M -$79.5M $214.7M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 2:27pm (39d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth -11.0% +0.2% +29.1% +53.0%
Gross Profit Growth -46.7% -2.8% +75.5% +213.9%
Operating Income Growth -85.1% -459.2% +337.9% +384.4%
Net Income Growth -206.4% -125.5% +142.5% +798.6%
EBITDA Growth -38.5% -24.5% +149.4% +129.3%
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 2:03pm (39d ago)
Date Dividend Declaration Record Payment
2026-05-22 $0.00
2026-03-09 $0.00
2025-11-24 $0.00
2025-08-22 $0.00
2025-05-23 $0.00
2025-03-10 $0.00
2024-11-21 $0.01
2024-08-26 $0.01
2024-05-23 $0.01
2024-03-11 $0.01
2023-11-22 $0.01
2023-08-23 $0.01
2023-06-14 $0.01
2023-05-19 $0.01
2023-03-08 $0.01
2022-11-23 $0.00
2022-08-18 $0.01
2022-05-24 $0.01
2022-03-08 $0.01
2021-11-18 $0.01
0Company Classification 1Industry Landscape 2Company Momentum 3Forward Projection 4aDCF Valuation 4bEarnings Power Value 4cAnchored PE 4dReverse DCF 4eRevenue-Based DCF 4fAnchored P/S 4gScenario Analysis 4hDividend Discount Model 4iBook Value Analysis 4jInsider Activity 4fCash Flow Quality 4gDebt Maturity Risk 4hMacro Environment 4iSector Intelligence 4jRevenue Confidence 4kSensitivity Analysis 4lSector Demand Cycle 5AI Investigation 5bThesis Evaluation 6Valuation Synthesis
computed not applicable 18 computed · 6 not applicable
Risk : Reward — upside vs downside from this company's own quarters
Computed 2026-09-06 19:13
0.2 : 1 +1σ upside vs −1σ downside, from this company's own quarterly history
A +1σ run of quarters pays +14%; a −1σ run costs 71%. Ratio 0.2:1 (μ 57.5%, σ 49.2% , 16 pairs).
CaseGrowthMarginFair valuevs price ($14.12)
Bull — recovery +100% 22.0% $51.03 +261%
Base — stabilizes +67% 19.2% $21.87 +55%
Bear — keeps slipping +33% 16.3% $8.28 -41%
Stress — last quarter repeats +52% 21.1% $17.05 +21%
Upside — a +1σ run of quarters (v2) +50% 21.1% $16.05 +14%
Stress — a −1σ run of quarters (v2) +8% 16.5% $4.13 -71%
The next quarters keep the trajectory of the worst recent matched quarter (ending 2026-06-30) — growth stays at 52.5% and margins bend by the same profit-vs-revenue ratio (×1.10). Stress is a trajectory, not a prediction — it answers "what if the ship's current heading simply continues," which history says is the case to respect.
Why this is appearing: this company files quarterly, so its recent trajectory could be measured rather than assumed — the engine matched Jun 2026, Mar 2026 against the same quarters one year earlier and found revenue +75.6% · operating income +250.0% · net income +14.2% year-over-year. That measured heading is what the stress case extends forward. Of those, the stress case extends the worst matched quarter — the one ending Jun 30, 2026 (revenue +52.4%, operating income +151.3% YoY) — not the average. Data measured through Jun 30, 2026 — this card recalculates automatically when the next quarterly filing is ingested. Companies without quarterly filings (many foreign listings) never show this card: with no measured trajectory, there is nothing honest to repeat.
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for HL — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-02 14:26:27
Verdict Overvalued at $14 but the $4 DCF is too harsh — fair value ~$7-9; Q1 2026 net loss is the tell, wait for Q2 clarity or a silver pullback before touching.

Independent read first: Hecla is a silver/gold miner riding a commodity tape. FY2025 revenue of $1.42B (+53% YoY) with net income of $321.7M vs. $35.8M is almost entirely price-driven — silver went from mid-teens/low-$20s to $30+ over the period, and gold ripped alongside. Gross margin exploded from 21.3% (2024) to 43.7% (2025), which is the classic operating leverage signature of a price-taker with fixed costs, not a business that structurally improved. Look at the 2022-2023 baseline: on $718-720M of revenue Hecla booked operating losses or barely-breakeven results. This is not a compounder; it's a leveraged bet on realized metal prices with a decent (Greens Creek) primary asset attached.

The Q1 2026 print is the tell everyone should be staring at: revenue $411.4M is actually solid sequentially vs Q1 2025's $205.3M, but net income flipped to -$19.0M despite silver and gold both being higher YoY. That is a massive negative operating leverage surprise — either cash costs spiked, there was a one-time charge, hedge losses, or production/grade issues at a key mine. A miner that can't print positive NI in Q1 2026 with silver near multi-year highs has a cost problem the headline FY2025 numbers hide. The "revenue_cagr 40.6%" and "earnings_cagr 798%" figures the momentum model spits out are arithmetic artifacts of a cyclical trough-to-peak comparison and should carry near-zero forecasting weight.

On the model stack: the rule-based "high_growth_profitable" archetype is straightforwardly wrong — this is textbook late-cycle cyclical, and the classifier's 0.64 confidence should have been a red flag to override. The pre-flight note correctly calls it traditional/mature but then hand-waves toward "normalized $30 silver makes PE cheap," which is exactly the reasoning error you make at cycle tops. The synthesis DCF at $4.17 is almost certainly using mid-cycle price decks and looks directionally right on methodology but probably too punitive — a fair value of $4 implies silver reverts to ~$20 and stays there, which is one scenario, not the scenario. The market-forces "value trap" call and the narrative engine's "85% story / fragile" framing are the two most honest reads in the stack, and they agree with each other. The insider table is unreadable as signaled (all awards/J-Other/F-InKind on a single date — that's a vesting/grant event, not conviction buying or selling), so I discount the "No Insider Transactions" secondary signal entirely.

A careful contrarian would push back on the $4 fair value: Hecla has zero total debt, $241.6M cash, $310M FCF in 2025, and Greens Creek is a genuinely tier-one asset with decades of reserve life. If silver holds $28-32 (not $35+, just holds), 2026 FCF could plausibly run $350-450M, putting the stock at roughly 20-27x FCF at $9.5B market cap — expensive but not absurd for a debt-free primary silver producer with optionality on gold. The bull case isn't crazy; it's just that you're paying full price for it today with Q1 already showing cracks. My fair value band is $7-9 assuming silver mean-reverts modestly to the mid-$20s and Hecla earns ~$180-220M normalized, giving a 45-55x trough PE that's still generous for a cyclical. That's below current $14.12 but well above the synthesis $4.17.

I partially agree with the synthesis direction (overvalued) but dissent on magnitude. The $4.17 anchor treats this like a distressed miner reverting to 2022-2023 economics; that ignores the balance sheet strength and Greens Creek's structural position. However, at $14.12 you are absolutely paying peak-cycle multiples on peak-cycle earnings, with a Q1 2026 print that just flashed a warning light the models haven't digested. The right stance is: overvalued at $14, but not a $4 stock — closer to $8. Waiting for either (a) a Q2 2026 print that clarifies whether Q1's loss was one-time or structural, or (b) a silver pullback that resets the multiple, is the disciplined move. Do not short a debt-free silver miner in a live commodity bull tape; do not buy at 28x PE on trough-to-peak comps either.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-02 14:26:41
Verdict Fairly to moderately overvalued at $14.12 — strong balance sheet and real 2025 cash flow help, but the stock is priced too close to peak economics; I’d need a pullback toward $9-$11 or proof that 2025 margins persist.

The raw numbers say Hecla is not a “high-growth profitable” company so much as a highly operationally leveraged miner that had one exceptional year and then immediately reminded you why cyclicals should not be capitalized like software. Revenue jumped from $929.9M in 2024 to $1.42B in 2025, and net income exploded from $35.8M to $321.7M, with operating cash flow at $562.6M and free cash flow at $310.2M. That is real improvement, not accounting noise, and the balance sheet is undeniably strong with $241.6M of cash and zero debt. But the quarterly sequence matters more than the annual snapshot: revenue ran from $205.3M in 2025Q1 to $504.1M in 2025Q4, then fell back to $411.4M in 2026Q1 while net income swung from +$134.4M to -$19.0M. A business that can go from a 26.7% margin to -4.6% in one quarter is not something I want to pay 28.8x trailing earnings and 13.6x EV/EBITDA for, especially at 6.5x sales in a mining business.

What stands out is that the market is capitalizing peak-ish margins as if they are durable. In 2025, gross margin was 43.7%, operating margin 36.2%, and net margin 22.6%—numbers that look fantastic until you stack them against the prior four years. In 2023 Hecla lost $84.2M on $720.2M of revenue; in 2022 it lost $37.3M on $718.9M; in 2021 it made just $35.1M on $807.5M. The company has clearly improved, but the longer history says profitability is heavily path-dependent on metal prices and mine performance. At a $9.47B market cap against $2.59B of equity, investors are paying 3.6x book for depleting assets in a cyclical business. Even if I give credit for the debt-free balance sheet and the cash generation in 2025, the current price implies that 2025 is a baseline rather than a favorable year. The ugly 2026Q1 print argues the opposite.

The biggest contradiction in the supplied views is the idea that the stock’s expensive trailing PE can be waved away because earnings are “trough-to-mid-cycle.” The data does not support that framing. 2025 was by far the best year in the set on revenue, operating income, net income, and cash flow. Trough-to-mid-cycle companies do not usually post $321.7M of annual net income and then trade at 6.5x trailing sales because investors think earnings are depressed. If anything, the risk is that trailing metrics are flattering because they captured a sweet spot in realized prices and operating leverage. The model fair value around $4 looks too punitive to me because it appears to under-credit the debt-free balance sheet, materially better recent operating profile, and strong 2025 free cash flow. But rejecting that model does not make $14.12 attractive; it just means the stock is less absurdly overvalued than the most bearish machine output suggests.

The best counterargument is straightforward: Hecla has transformed its earnings power. The annual progression from $106.3M operating income in 2024 to $514.8M in 2025 is massive, and operating cash flow of $562.6M versus capex of $252.4M shows the business can fund itself and still throw off serious cash. Zero debt matters in a cyclical miner because it removes the balance-sheet death spiral that destroys many commodity names at the wrong point in the cycle. If silver and gold prices stay elevated, the 2026Q1 loss could prove to be a temporary operational or cost hiccup rather than a reversion signal, and on mid-cycle-to-high-cycle commodity assumptions the current multiple could compress quickly. That is the strongest bull case, and it is credible. I still weigh it lower because one weak quarter after a banner year is exactly how cyclicals tell you not to annualize the peak.

What would change my mind is not narrative about structural silver demand; it is proof in the next two or three quarters that 2025 economics are repeatable. Specifically, I would want to see revenue hold above roughly $400M per quarter while net margin returns to at least low-double digits, not another loss at similar sales. If Hecla can produce something like $450M-$500M quarterly revenue with $50M-$80M of net income and keep annualized free cash flow above $250M without taking on debt, then the current price would look much more defensible and I would revisit a bullish stance. If instead 2026 tracks closer to a break-even or negative earnings year, the stock should not be anywhere near 28x earnings or 6.5x sales; in that case, a price in the high single digits would be easier to justify than $14.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-02 14:27:30
Verdict Overvalued at $14.12; mid-cycle fair value nearer $8–10 given Q1 margin collapse and thin 3.3% FCF yield

The numbers tell a classic late-cycle commodity leverage story that has already started to crack. Hecla went from $720M revenue and an $84M loss in 2023 to $1.42B revenue and $322M of net income in 2025, with operating margins exploding from negative to 36% and free cash flow hitting $310M on a newly debt-free balance sheet holding $242M cash. That is real operating leverage to the silver price, not accounting fiction. Yet the most recent quarter—Q1 2026—printed $411M of revenue (still double the year-ago period) and a $19M loss. Margins did not gently compress; they collapsed. Sequential revenue also rolled over hard from the $504M Q4 peak. A 29x trailing PE, 6.5x sales, and 3.3% FCF yield on a cyclical miner whose earnings just went negative again is not a bargain; it is the market still capitalizing 2025 peak margins as if they were durable. Book value is only ~$3.86 per share against a $14.12 price, and ROE of 12% does not justify a 3.6x price-to-book multiple once metal prices stop rising.

The valuation models calling fair value ~$4.17 are directionally correct that the stock embeds a large premium, but they are too punitive. Zero net debt, $310M of actual free cash flow, and ownership of Greens Creek (a tier-one primary silver asset) are worth more than liquidation book value even in a mid-cycle silver tape. A normalized earner in the $150–200M net income range at a 12–15x multiple plus net cash gets you closer to $8–10, not $4. The 70% downside claim therefore overstates the fundamental floor, even while correctly flagging that $14.12 leaves almost no margin of safety. Revenue CAGR of 41% and the 798% earnings jump are backward-looking artifacts of the metal-price spike; the quarterly trend is already decelerating and the fresh loss confirms earnings quality is hostage to the spot tape.

The strongest case against an overvalued read is straightforward: if silver re-accelerates toward $35+ and stays there, Hecla’s fixed-cost mines will again throw off $400M+ of annual FCF, the 29x PE compresses rapidly on surging earnings, and the fortress balance sheet lets them return capital or consolidate weaker producers. The bull narrative around structural silver deficits from solar, EVs, and AI data-center demand is not pure fantasy, and the stock has already halved from its $34 high, so some of the froth has been cleared. I weigh this less heavily because the Q1 2026 loss arrived while revenue was still elevated, proving cost inflation and grade/volume variability can erase the operating leverage just as fast as metal prices created it. Paying 6.5x sales and 13.6x EBITDA for that asymmetry, with macro headwinds flagged and no open-market insider buying, is a poor risk-reward.

What flips the verdict is simple and observable: two consecutive quarters of positive free cash flow above $70M each while silver sits at or below current levels, or a sustained move in silver back above $32 that restores 25%+ net margins without a matching multiple expansion. Either would force a re-rating toward fair. A further sequential revenue decline below $350M or another loss-making quarter would confirm the $8–10 zone is still too optimistic.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 1.3; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 2.0
overvalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +0.7 vs panel · self: 3.0
GPT gpt-5.4 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -0.3 vs panel · self: 3.0
Grok grok-4.5 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -0.3 vs panel · self: 3.0
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), and General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-02 21:46:46
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Overvalued — pass, revisit on pullback 7/10
HL is a decent cyclical miner priced for a silver super-cycle — great tape, bad math, and I'm not chasing $14 when the fundamentals argue $6-9.
The cruxWhether the 2025 margin inflection is a new normal or a commodity-cycle peak — everything above ~$8 is a silver-price bet, not a business bet.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from HL's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionModerate Dilution
Earnings QualityHigh Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
-11
Mixed
edge √Σ 98 · risk √Σ 109 · conf 6/10

Hecla's 2025 print is genuinely strong on the surface: revenue jumped to $1.42B from $929.9M, gross margin expanded to 43.7% from 21.3%, operating margin hit 36.2%, and net income of $321.7M was matched by $310.2M of FCF. OCF/NI of 2.16x and accruals of -5.9% of assets say the earnings are cash-backed, and Altman Z of 6.8 with $301.2M net cash means solvency is not a question. That is a real operating inflection, not an accounting mirage - though the Beneish M at -0.15 flags the sheer magnitude of the year-over-year change and warrants a look at cost capitalization and receivables.

Strengths 3
m70
2025 cash-backed earnings breakout
Revenue +53% to $1.42B, GM% 43.7 vs 21.3, OpM 36.2%, net income $321.7M with $310.2M FCF and OCF/NI 2.16x - earnings are real cash, not accruals.
m55
Solid balance sheet
$301.2M net cash, Altman Z 6.8, self-funding from operations - no survival math risk and no dependence on capital markets in current price environment.
m40
Negative accruals
Accruals at -5.9% of assets indicate conservative recognition; cash is outrunning reported earnings, not the reverse.
Concerns 5
m65
Persistent dilution
Diluted shares grew 542.2M to 655.8M (4.9% CAGR) while buybacks offset only 32.2% of SBC - per-share value is being steadily eroded even in a great operating year.
m70
Cyclical, not structural, quality
2022-2023 saw operating losses and negative FCF ($-148.4M in 2023); 2025 excellence is two years old and coincides with precious-metals strength - durability of margins is unproven through a cycle.
m35
Beneish M flag
M-score -0.15 vs -1.78 threshold reflects the sheer magnitude of YoY change; likely commodity-price driven but the model can't distinguish that from aggressive recognition without segment detail.
m30
No insider conviction
Tape is entirely awards (A) and tax-withholding (F) - zero open-market P buys from officers or directors despite the operational turnaround.
m25
FCF quality flagged weak by e2e
Despite headline OCF/NI 2.16x, FCF quality is tagged weak - likely capex/working-capital timing in a capital-intensive mining model; worth verifying sustaining-capex adequacy.
This looks to me like a well-run cyclical miner having a very good year, not a quality compounder. The 2025 numbers are legitimate - cash matches earnings, the balance sheet is clean, and Keno Hill / metals prices have clearly kicked in. But I can't ignore that operating margins were negative just two years ago, that the share count has grown nearly 21% in four years while buybacks barely dent the SBC, and that insiders haven't bought a share on the open market. Strip out the commodity cycle and this is a Solid-to-Mixed operator, not a Fortress. Grade it on state, not on the tailwind.
Verify before trusting this (6)
  • 10-K breakdown of 2025 revenue: how much of the 53% jump is realized metals prices vs volume vs Keno Hill ramp
  • Sustaining vs growth capex split - reported FCF quality flag suggests sustaining capex may be under-counted
  • Segment mine-level cash costs and AISC to test margin durability if silver/gold prices normalize
  • SBC grant structure and whether the 4.9% dilution CAGR reflects RSU vesting cadence or ongoing equity raises
  • Any convertible or streaming obligations that could dilute or encumber future cash flows
  • Receivables and inventory trends to close out the Beneish M flag
Valuation / Mispricing
-75
Overvalued
edge √Σ 23 · risk √Σ 121 · conf 7/10
price $14.12 vs composite deserved ~$4.02 (signal-adj $4.17); ~-70% margin of safety - stock is ~3.4x deserved value. attractive below $6.00

The e2e synthesis lands at a composite fair value of $4.02 and a signal-adjusted $4.17, with DCF at $4.33, anchored P/E at $4.13, and an EPV floor of $1.91 - all three independent methods cluster in the $2-$4 range versus a $14.12 price. That is a -70% implied gap. Even if you grant the DCF full credit and layer a quality premium for the clean balance sheet and Greens Creek's asset quality, getting to $14 requires assuming today's metals prices are the new normal and that 2025's margin inflection is durable - a heroic ask for a business that was posting negative operating margins two years ago and has diluted shares ~21% in four years. The Company-Quality lens grades this Mixed, not a compounder, so there is no wide-moat premium to bail out the multiple. The bear case is essentially the valuation math: price embeds a silver super-cycle. If silver normalizes, the deserved value reverts toward the $4-6 zone, not $14. I don't see a margin of safety anywhere in the stack; the only way the price is right is if you underwrite sustained silver strength AND believe the market will keep paying a cyclical peak multiple on peak earnings.

Cheap signals 2
m18
High earnings quality reduces haircut
Cash matches earnings and the balance sheet is clean, so the deserved value shouldn't be haircut for accruals - but this only defends the ~$4 fair value, not the $14 price.
m15
Greens Creek scarcity value
World's largest primary silver mine deserves some strategic premium above pure DCF - but even a generous 50% premium on $4 only gets you to $6, not $14.
Rich / priced-in 3
m82
Three methods cluster far below price
DCF $4.33, anchored P/E $4.13, EPV floor $1.91 - composite $4.02 vs $14.12 price. When independent methods agree this tightly, the -70% gap is hard to dismiss as one runaway model.
m70
Priced for a silver super-cycle
To justify $14 you need sustained silver strength plus continued margin expansion; the 2025 inflection is only two years old and prior years ran negative operating margins.
m55
Dilution leaks per-share value
Share count up ~21% over four years with only token buybacks - even if enterprise value compounds, per-share deserved value grows slower than headlines suggest.
I can't make this price work. Three independent methods land in the $2-$4 range and the stock is at $14 - that's a 3x gap, not a rounding error. This is a decent cyclical miner having its best year in a long time, and the market is extrapolating that into perpetuity. I'd need it under $6 before the valuation gets interesting on its own merits, and even then I'd want to see the margin structure hold through a full cycle. At $14 you're not buying a business, you're buying a silver-price forecast.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Realized silver and gold prices in the latest quarter vs assumptions baked into consensus
  • Keno Hill ramp sustainability and unit cost trajectory
  • Guidance on capex and any further equity issuance
  • Whether 2025 free cash flow annualizes cleanly or was boosted by one-off working-capital release
General Sentiment
+58
Strong Tailwind
tail √Σ 118 · head √Σ 51 · conf 8/10

Sentiment on HL is being driven overwhelmingly by an active, strong-intensity silver bull narrative tied to AI power buildout, renewables, and inflation hedging. As the operator of Greens Creek (the world's largest primary silver mine), HL is the poster child that traders reach for when they want leveraged silver exposure, so narrative flows land squarely on this ticker. Momentum confirms it: 40.6% CAGR with a recent 53% acceleration and +34pp over three years is the tape of a name being bid on story, not multiples. The macro tape is a mild net positive (regime score +22, VIX 16, S&P near highs), which is exactly the calm-with-a-bid backdrop that lets a high-beta (1.29) precious-metals story keep running. Higher rates would normally bite a non-cash-generative miner, but the inflation-hedge framing inside the silver narrative neutralizes that pressure and even reframes it as bullish. The fragility flag matters: durability is rated fragile and the bear case (price is ~85% story vs a $4.17 DCF) means any crack in the silver thesis, a sharp spot pullback, or a rotation out of precious metals would hit hard and fast given how much of the current price is sentiment. But right now, today, the pressure vector is clearly up: narrative is live, momentum is confirming, macro is permissive.

Tailwinds 3
m82
Live silver/AI-demand narrative lands directly on HL
The AI-power plus renewables plus inflation-hedge silver story is a strong-intensity active narrative, and Greens Creek makes HL the default leveraged vehicle for it. Narrative flow into the silver cohort concentrates here.
m78
Momentum is confirming the story
40.6% CAGR with a recent 53% acceleration and +34pp over three years is textbook narrative-driven bid. Trend followers and momentum funds keep pressing names that behave like this.
m35
Permissive macro tape for high-beta story stocks
Neutral-to-mildly-positive regime (+22), VIX 16, index near highs. Beta 1.29 means calm-with-a-bid amplifies upside, not downside, and there is no risk-off pressure forcing de-grossing right now.
Headwinds 2
m45
Narrative durability rated fragile
The story is strong but fragile per the brief; a silver spot pullback or a rotation would remove the entire bid mechanism quickly since ~85% of the price is story. This is latent, not active, pressure but it caps how much further sentiment can stretch.
m25
Rates backdrop mildly hostile to non-yielding miners
10y at 4.68% and market PE 26.9 are a general drag on speculative, cash-light names. Currently swamped by the inflation-hedge framing but a bond-market shock could flip this from muted to biting.
Net pressure is clearly up. HL is the go-to leveraged silver-narrative name in a moment when that narrative is live, intense, and being validated daily by price action, with a macro tape calm enough to let it run. I do not have to like the fundamentals or the valuation to call this - my job is the pressure vector, and the vector is a strong tailwind. The catch is durability: this is the kind of tailwind that can invert violently if silver rolls over, so the read is strong-tailwind-now, not strong-tailwind-forever.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Silver spot price behavior around the $35/oz level cited in the bull case - a rejection there would crack the narrative
  • Any sign of ETF or CTA outflows from precious-metals funds signaling rotation
  • Sell-side target revisions - divergence between rising price and flat targets is an early warning
  • VIX regime change or a risk-off rotation that would hit beta 1.29 disproportionately
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
Growth Outlook
not run

This lens hasn't been run for this ticker yet.

The forward growth verdict — is the business itself likely to grow (next 2 quarters / year 1 / years 2–3), judged against its category and against printed expectations. The full horizon ladder + creme renders on the Growth Outlook card above. Not a call on the price (Valuation owns that) or the tape (Sentiment owns that).
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), and Growth Outlook (the forward growth verdict). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Price Prediction
Unavailable View weakness chain →

Prediction unavailable. No usable fair-value anchor — composite, DCF and anchored-PE are all absent from valuation-synthesis. Typical for pre-profit / narrative-platform names where those methods don't apply.

Post-Report Due Diligence NOTES
The report is written. This is what its valuation stands on.
Analyzed Sep 9, 2026 · 02:04 2d ago
Read epv-floor ext-gem-composite anchored-pe · FY income statement, balance sheet
1 finding · $0, re-derived on each view

Evidence for a closer look, not a verdict — no score or designation on this page has been changed by it. Items marked material are ones where a conclusion above moves to the other side of the price.

Cash credited — gross vs net of debt NOTE known case
as published $485.3M gross alternative $25.9M net of debt
The floor adds $485.3M of cash to equity value but never subtracts the $275.3M of debt on the same balance sheet. Netting the two is the figure the report's own prose uses.
Price at analysis $14.12. This is where an investigation should start — it is not where one ends. Nothing here was checked against the filings, the tape, or the news; that is the investigator's job.
Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for HL. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
v1.1.608 · 729fcfcd · 2026-09-10 22:28:53