For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Alamos Gold Inc. (AGI) — 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 2026-08-23): Designation Low · Gem Score -23 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 42 · Value -77 · Sentiment 29 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $15.62 vs $28.21 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 capextended-analysis— the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memofuture-predictions— our forward price-band predictionsmarket-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.
Alamos Gold Inc.
AGI NYSEAlamos Gold Inc. is a Canadian-based intermediate gold producer focused on the acquisition, exploration, development, and operation of gold and other precious metal assets. The company’s core activities are organized around three primary operating segments: the Young-Davidson and Island Gold operations in Canada, and the Mulatos mine in Sonora, Mexico. These assets position Alamos Gold Inc. firmly within the basic materials sector and the gold mining industry, supplying refined gold into global markets. The Island Gold District is a key contributor to the company’s current production profile, with the other mines providing additional geographic and operational diversification across North America. Headquartered in Toronto, Canada, and founded in 2003, Alamos Gold Inc. plays a significant role as a mid-tier producer, bridging the gap between smaller single-asset miners and large global gold companies, and providing investors with exposure to the underlying gold commodity through a diversified portfolio of producing mines.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
Alamos Gold Inc. is a foreign private issuer — it reports to the U.S. SEC once a year (on Form 20-F or 40-F) rather than filing the quarterly statements (10-Q) that U.S.-domiciled companies must submit. Our financial statements are read directly from SEC filings, so for this company only annual figures exist at the source.
This is a property of how the company files, not missing or broken data — its filing history shows 8 annual reports, the latest filed 2026-03-26, and no quarterly filings . The company may still publish quarterly results on its own investor-relations site.
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 2.10
Total Equity: $4.45B
Shares: 422,662,000
Total Debt: $200.00M
Cash: $623.10M
EBITDA: N/A
Total Debt: $200.00M
Cash: $623.10M
Revenue: $1.81B
Revenue: $1.81B
Revenue: $1.81B
Total Equity: $4.45B
Tax Rate: 18.7%
Equity: $4.45B
Total Debt: $200.00M
Cash: $623.10M
Current Liabilities: $567.60M
Long-Term Debt: $200.00M
Total Debt: $200.00M
Total Equity: $4.45B
Shares: 422,662,000
Shares: 422,662,000
CapEx: -$507.10M
Shares: 422,662,000
Stock Price: $28.21
Net Income: $885.80M
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 3, 2026 12:07pm (20d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $823.6M | $821.2M | $1.0B | $1.3B | $1.8B |
| Cost of Revenue | $534.1M | $608.9M | $637.7M | $751.1M | $809.5M |
| Gross Profit | $289.5M | $212.3M | $385.6M | $595.8M | $999.3M |
| Operating Expenses | $274.6M | $100.8M | $67.5M | $33.9M | -$98.2M |
| Operating Income | $14.9M | $111.5M | $318.1M | $561.9M | $1.1B |
| Net Income | -$66.7M | $37.1M | $210.0M | $284.3M | $885.8M |
| EBITDA | — | — | — | — | — |
| EPS | $-0.17 | $0.09 | $0.53 | $0.70 | $2.11 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $-0.17 | $0.09 | $0.53 | $0.69 | $2.10 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 3, 2026 12:09pm (20d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | $172.5M | $129.8M | $224.8M | $327.2M | $623.1M |
| Total Current Assets | $459.4M | $441.0M | $586.0M | $648.6M | $1.1B |
| Total Assets | $3.6B | $3.7B | $4.0B | $5.3B | $6.4B |
| Current Liabilities | $157.4M | $181.9M | $247.9M | $430.9M | $567.6M |
| Long-Term Debt | — | — | $0 | $250.0M | $200.0M |
| Total Liabilities | $885.9M | $953.1M | $1.1B | $1.8B | $1.9B |
| Total Equity | $2.7B | $2.7B | $2.9B | $3.6B | $4.4B |
| Retained Earnings | -$1.0B | -$1.0B | -$876.8M | -$606.2M | $217.2M |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 3, 2026 12:09pm (20d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $356.5M | $298.5M | $472.7M | $661.1M | $795.3M |
| Capital Expenditure | -$348.6M | -$313.7M | -$348.9M | -$417.6M | -$507.1M |
| Free Cash Flow | $7.9M | -$15.2M | $123.8M | $243.5M | $288.2M |
| Acquisitions (net) | $0 | — | — | $30.2M | $0 |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | $-200,000 | $0 | $0 | -$58.3M | -$50.0M |
| Dividends Paid | -$34.5M | -$35.1M | -$35.3M | -$35.1M | -$39.5M |
| Stock Buybacks | — | — | — | — | — |
| Net Change in Cash | -$48.0M | -$42.7M | $95.0M | $102.4M | $295.9M |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 3, 2026 12:07pm (20d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | -0.3% | +24.6% | +31.6% | +34.3% |
| Gross Profit Growth | -26.7% | +81.6% | +54.5% | +67.7% |
| Operating Income Growth | +648.3% | +185.3% | +76.6% | +95.3% |
| Net Income Growth | +155.6% | +466.0% | +35.4% | +211.6% |
| EBITDA Growth | — | — | — | — |
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 3, 2026 12:09pm (20d ago)| Date | Dividend | Declaration | Record | Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-11 | $0.04 | — | — | — |
| 2026-03-12 | $0.04 | — | — | — |
| 2025-06-12 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2025-03-13 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2024-12-05 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2024-09-12 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2024-06-13 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2024-03-13 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2023-12-05 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2023-09-13 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2023-06-14 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2023-03-15 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2022-12-05 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2022-09-14 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2022-06-15 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2022-03-16 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2021-12-06 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2021-09-15 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2021-06-15 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
| 2021-03-16 | $0.03 | — | — | — |
Deep Analysis
Narrative Economics
market-narrative step).
Claude Reading
Starting from the raw numbers: Alamos ran $823M revenue in 2021 with a $67M net loss and $15M operating income, and in 2025 posted $1.81B revenue, $1.10B operating income, and $886M net income. That's not a mining company doing normal things — operating margin went from 1.8% to 60.7% in four years. Gold spot averaged roughly $1,800 in 2021 and is running $2,600-3,000+ in 2025, so a huge portion of that margin expansion is price, not operating leverage. Production growth at Alamos has been mid-single-digits; the rest is pure commodity beta. FCF of $288M on $795M operating cash flow implies capex of $507M — that's a 64% reinvestment rate, so the "free" cash yield on an $11.7B market cap is only 2.5%. That's the tell the synthesis and narrative layers are correctly picking up.
The synthesis fair value of $15.62 is doing something specific: normalizing gold prices. If you assume gold reverts to a $2,000-2,200 long-run deck, Alamos's revenue drops ~25-30% and, because costs are largely fixed, net income could fall 50-60% — a normalized earnings power of maybe $350-450M, which on a 15x mid-cycle multiple gets you $5-7B market cap, or $12-17/share. The DCF is internally consistent with that. Where I'd push back on the synthesis is the precision: $15.62 → $16.44 pretends to two-decimal accuracy on a commodity forecast. The honest range is $14-22 depending on your gold deck, and if you believe central bank buying has structurally repriced gold to a $2,600+ floor (which is not crazy — CB net purchases have been 1,000+ tonnes annually for three years), fair value drifts toward $22-28 and the stock is roughly fair, not 42% overvalued.
The contrarian case the models underweight: Alamos has a genuinely clean balance sheet ($623M cash, $200M debt, 0.045 D/E) in a sector infamous for leverage blowups, ROIC of 22% is elite for gold miners, and the tier-one jurisdictional mix (Canada-heavy, with Island Gold expansion coming online) is worth a premium versus peers with African or Latin American concentration risk. The "mature_earner" archetype tag is misleading — this is a cyclical, not a compounder, and the 105% earnings CAGR is a price artifact, not a business quality signal. The market-forces "neutral" and narrative "fragile durability" reads are more honest than the classification layer. Also worth noting: the 49% drawdown from $55 to $28 that pre-flight cites doesn't match a stock at all-time-high fundamentals — either the price data is stale/wrong, or there's been a specific operational or M&A event the file isn't capturing. That's a real data-quality flag; I wouldn't anchor on the $55 high without verifying.
Net: I partially agree with the overvalued verdict but think the magnitude is overstated. At $28.21 with $886M in TTM net income, the 13.4x P/E is not demanding on current numbers — the question is entirely what gold does. My normalized fair value range is $18-24, not $15.62, giving 15-35% downside rather than 42%. That's still overvalued, but it's a "trim, don't short" verdict, and for investors who want gold exposure Alamos is arguably the highest-quality vehicle in the intermediate producer space — the premium to DCF is partly justified by balance sheet and jurisdiction quality that a pure DCF won't capture. The narrative layer's "fragile durability" is the key insight: this works until gold rolls over, and when it does, the multiple compresses simultaneously with earnings — the classic cyclical double-whammy. I wouldn't buy here, wouldn't short here, and would want $20-22 to build a position for the structural gold thesis. The synthesis is directionally right, too precise on the number.
GPT Reading
The numbers say Alamos is not a speculative miner being valued on hope; it is already a highly profitable producer with a fortress balance sheet, and that matters more to me than the model’s blunt “overvalued” label. Revenue has gone from $823.6M in 2021 to $1.81B in 2025, a 2.2x increase, while net income has swung from a $66.7M loss to $885.8M. Even more striking, 2025 operating income was $1.10B on $1.81B of sales, implying a 60.7% operating margin, and net margin was 48.9%. Those are extraordinary figures for a mining business, but they are not accompanied by a stretched balance sheet or financial engineering: debt is just $200M against $623.1M of cash, for net cash of roughly $423M, and debt/equity is only 0.045. A miner producing 19.9% ROE and 22.2% ROIC with net cash is not obviously mispriced at 13.4x earnings.
What stands out most is the mismatch between the valuation framework and the actual capital structure and earnings power. Yes, 6.6x sales and 6.2x EV/revenue look expensive if you value this like an ordinary industrial, but for a gold producer the better question is what earnings and cash flow survive under a less euphoric commodity deck. On that score, 2025 free cash flow was only $288.2M because capex was a heavy $507.1M, while operating cash flow was a much stronger $795.3M. That tells me current free cash flow understates normalized owner earnings if capex moderates after a build phase. The market cap of $11.69B against $795M of operating cash flow is not cheap, but it is not absurd either for a clean, liquid, jurisdictionally decent producer with visible production growth and almost no balance-sheet risk. A 0.46% dividend yield is irrelevant here; the real shareholder protection is that the company can fund spending internally and still sit on net cash.
The most important contradiction in the bearish case is that the models seem to treat 2025 as a pure peak-cycle mirage while ignoring how broad the operating improvement has been. This is not one anomalous year after years of stagnation: gross profit climbed from $212.3M in 2022 to $385.6M in 2023, $595.8M in 2024, and $999.3M in 2025. Operating income went from $111.5M to $318.1M to $561.9M to $1.10B over the same span. That stair-step matters. Even if gold prices soften, Alamos is entering that softer tape from a position of unusual strength. At $28.21, the stock looks more like a fairly priced to mildly undervalued high-quality gold lever than a 40% overvaluation. The market is not paying some crazy bubble multiple; it is paying 13x trailing earnings for a company that has materially de-risked itself.
The strongest case against my read is straightforward: these margins are too good to last, and if you normalize earnings aggressively the stock gets expensive fast. A 48.9% net margin in mining is not a base-rate outcome, and the gap between operating cash flow of $795.3M and free cash flow of $288.2M is a reminder that this business still consumes real capital. If 2025 is near peak realized gold pricing and capex remains elevated, then the headline P/E is flattered and EV/revenue north of 6x is dangerous for a commodity producer with no moat. A skeptic would also point to the stock having fallen from $55 to $28 as evidence that the market already sniffed out a cyclical earnings peak. That is a legitimate warning. I weigh it differently because the current quote already reflects a lot of skepticism, while the company’s net cash, 2.0 current ratio, and multi-year earnings trajectory give it far more resilience than a typical late-cycle miner.
What would change my mind is not a lower gold price by itself, but evidence that earnings power is collapsing back toward 2023-2024 levels without offsetting volume growth or capex relief. If operating cash flow falls materially below $600M while capex stays around $500M, then today’s valuation would start to look rich. Likewise, if 2026 revenue cannot hold above roughly $1.5B and net income drops toward $400M-$500M, then the current 13.4x P/E would prove misleadingly low on peak earnings. On the other hand, if the company can sustain operating margins above 40%, keep net cash on the balance sheet, and convert more of that near-$800M operating cash flow into free cash as investment spending rolls off, then $28 will look more like a consolidation price than an overvaluation.
Grok Reading
The raw numbers describe a company that has undergone a genuine earnings regime change, not a one-quarter fluke. Revenue climbed from $821M in 2022 to $1.81B in 2025, a 33% CAGR, while net income swung from essentially zero to $886M. Gross margin expanded from the mid-20s to 55%, operating margin hit 61%, and net margin reached an extraordinary 49%. ROE of 20% and ROIC of 22% on a pristine balance sheet—$623M cash against only $200M debt, D/E of 0.045—confirm that capital is being deployed productively. Free cash flow of $288M after $507M of capex shows the company is still in heavy reinvestment mode rather than harvesting, which is consistent with intermediate producers expanding ounces. The 13.4x trailing P/E and 2.7x book therefore sit on top of a business that is objectively far stronger than it was three years ago. The roughly 50% drawdown from the $55 high has already forced a substantial re-rating; at $28 the market is no longer paying peak-cycle euphoria.
Where the quantitative models and I diverge is on how much of 2025’s profitability is permanent. A 49% net margin is not a mid-cycle gold-miner outcome even in a constructive gold tape; it embeds both elevated realized prices and unusually favorable cost leverage. FCF conversion of only ~33% of net income ($288M / $886M) underscores that reported earnings overstate owner cash generation while growth capex remains elevated. The 6.6x sales multiple and 6.2x EV/revenue are rich for a pure commodity producer whose volume growth, while solid, is not software-like. The valuation engine’s $16 fair value is directionally correct that mean reversion is underpriced, but it appears to under-weight the structural improvement in the cost base and the fortress balance sheet that gives Alamos staying power through a weaker gold tape. I land closer to the low-to-mid $20s as a more realistic normalized anchor than $16.
The strongest case against my caution is straightforward: gold may not mean-revert. Central-bank buying, fiscal dominance, and geopolitical fragmentation have kept bullion elevated, and Alamos is a low-cost, tier-one-jurisdiction producer (Canada/Mexico) with multi-mine diversification and rising production capacity. If gold holds or grinds higher, the 13.4x P/E on still-growing earnings becomes cheap, the 2.5% FCF yield expands rapidly as capex intensity rolls off, and the stock can re-rate toward the mid-teens multiple that gold bulls historically award quality intermediates. Momentum data—earnings CAGR above 100%, recent earnings +212% YoY—supports the view that operational leverage is still kicking in. A skeptic of my overvalued stance would simply say the models are using a gold price that the physical market has already left behind.
What would flip me is clear evidence that 2025 margins are durable: specifically, sustained all-in sustaining costs that keep net margins above ~30% even if gold settles $200–300 lower, FCF conversion rising above 50% as the current capex cycle peaks, and another year of mid-teens revenue growth without margin give-back. Conversely, two consecutive quarters of sequential margin compression toward the mid-20s net, or a material uptick in Mexican jurisdictional friction, would confirm the $16–18 zone as the right clearing price and push me more firmly short.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Claude — Second Response · fairly valued changed direction
VERDICT: Fairly valued to modestly overvalued at $28.21 — revised normalized range $20-26; hold, don't trim aggressively; accumulate below $22 remains the discipline
Both colleagues push on the same weak point in my original: I said "trim above $28, accumulate below $22" but the arithmetic supporting the $18-24 range leaned harder on gold reversion than the operating record actually justifies. GPT's stair-step observation is the argument that moved me most — gross profit going $212M → $386M → $596M → $999M across 2022-2025 is not a single-year price spike, it's a four-year progression where volume, cost discipline, and price all contributed. If I attribute the entire margin expansion to gold, I have to explain why 2022 gross margin was ~26% at $1,800 gold and 2023 was ~35% at similar gold — some of this is real operating leverage from Island Gold and La Yaqui Grande ramping. That means my "normalized net income of $350-450M" was probably $100-150M too low; a fairer normalized range is $500-600M, which pushes fair value from $12-17 to $16-22 on the same 15x multiple.
Where GPT overreaches is the "low-to-mid $30s" landing zone — that requires believing 40%+ operating margins are the new steady state, and I don't see the cost structure evidence for that. Grok's frame is closer to mine and I think more disciplined: 49% net margin is not a mid-cycle outcome regardless of how you slice the operating improvement, and the 33% FCF conversion is the number that keeps me from drifting bullish. A miner earning $886M reported but generating $288M in free cash is not worth 13x reported earnings; it's worth 13x something between reported and free, and until capex intensity rolls off we don't know which.
Net revision: I'm nudging my fair value range up from $18-24 to $20-26, acknowledging GPT's point that the operational base is stronger than a pure gold-deck normalization captures, while holding Grok's and my shared discipline that 49% net margins and 2.5% FCF yield embed too much permanence. At $28.21 that's fairly-valued-to-modestly-overvalued, not the "trim aggressively" posture my first read implied. Still wouldn't buy here; would stop calling it 15-35% downside and call it 5-25%.
GPT — Second Response · overvalued changed direction
VERDICT: Revised to modestly overvalued at $28.21; fair value looks closer to ~$22-25, with better entry below ~$22 and clear upside only if current gold/margin conditions prove durable.
Claude’s framing moved me more than Grok’s, specifically the normalization math tied to gold rather than the headline multiples alone. I underweighted how extreme a 60.7% operating margin and 48.9% net margin are for a miner, and the colleagues are right that production growth has not done enough work to explain the income jump; a large share is commodity price. The capex point also matters more on second pass: I treated $795M OCF as the truer earnings signal, but $288M of FCF on an $11.7B market cap is only a 2.5% yield, and for a commodity business that is not a cheap “owner earnings” setup unless capex actually rolls off soon. Where I still resist the harshest bearishness is the balance-sheet/jurisdiction premium. Net cash, low leverage, and Canada-heavy assets do justify paying above a bare mid-cycle DCF, so I still think $16 is too punitive except under a much lower gold deck.
So I am revising, but only partially. What failed to move me was the idea that today’s quote should be judged as though 2025 is a pure mirage; the multi-year stair-step in profitability is too broad for that. What did move me is the double sensitivity: if gold normalizes lower, earnings compress and the multiple likely compresses with them. That is a much stronger argument than simply saying EV/revenue looks rich. My updated view is that Alamos is a high-quality cyclical trading above normalized value, not a broken thesis and not a screaming short. The right anchor is probably a fair range around the low-to-mid $20s, with $20-22 attractive and $28+ requiring confidence that elevated gold pricing and post-build capex relief both persist.
Grok — Second Response · overvalued revised
VERDICT: Modestly overvalued at $28.21 — normalized $22–25; quality premium over $16 but not enough for current quote
Colleagues push opposite ways on identical facts. Claude’s $18-24 range and “trim, don’t short” framing land nearly on top of my original $21-24 anchor, correctly isolating gold beta (mid-single-digit volume growth) as the dominant driver of the 49% net margin and warning that the classic cyclical double-whammy remains unpriced. GPT’s counter—that the multi-year stair-step in gross profit ($212M→$999M) and operating income ($112M→$1.10B) from 2022-2025 plus net-cash fortress argue for low-to-mid $30s—is the one concrete argument I under-weighted; the trajectory is real and capex roll-off could lift the 2.5% FCF yield once the $507M spend moderates. That merit lifts my normalized floor a couple of dollars.
What failed to persuade is GPT’s leap from “resilient” to “fairly attractive at $28.” Even granting the stair-step and ROIC quality, a 6x+ EV/revenue multiple and 33% FCF conversion still embed peak realized gold that base-rate mining economics do not sustain; Claude’s jurisdictional-premium point already explains why pure DCF $16 is too low, yet does not justify paying current multiples for a pure producer. Balance-sheet strength cushions the downside but does not erase mean-reversion risk in margins. I therefore hold the modestly-overvalued call while acknowledging the quality buffer.
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
The business trajectory is genuinely impressive: revenue has more than doubled from $823.6M in 2021 to $1.81B in 2025, gross margin expanded from 35.2% to 55.2%, and operating margin ran from 1.8% to 60.7%. Net income scaled from a $66.7M loss to $885.8M, and FCF turned from breakeven ($7.9M in 2021) to $288.2M. Altman Z of 4.62 and net cash of $423.1M against a self-funding FCF profile put survival math well off the table. OCF/NI of 1.64x and accruals of -6.2% of assets are consistent with cash-backed earnings. This is a mature earner operating with real operating leverage into a supportive gold tape. Two nuances keep this out of Fortress territory. First, diluted shares grew from 392.6M to 422.7M (about 7.7% over four years, ~1.9% CAGR) with zero buyback offset against 3.7% SBC/revenue - per-share value is being modestly leaked rather than protected. Second, the Beneish M-score of -1.42 is above the -1.78 threshold; given the enormous margin jump in 2025 (OpM 41.7% to 60.7%), this deserves scrutiny even if OCF confirms much of the income. Durability is inherently commodity-linked: the margin story is partly gold-price driven, not purely operational, which caps how high the quality grade can climb regardless of current metrics.
Verify before trusting this (6)
- Drivers of the 2025 operating margin jump from 41.7% to 60.7% - realized gold price vs. cost improvements vs. one-time items
- Composition of the Beneish flag: which sub-indices (DSRI, GMI, AQI, accruals) triggered it
- Sustaining vs. growth capex breakdown and mine life at core assets (Young-Davidson, Island Gold, Mulatos/PDA)
- Any acquisition-related share issuance explaining the 2024-2025 share count step from 410.5M to 422.7M
- Reserve/resource replacement trends and all-in sustaining cost (AISC) trajectory
- Hedging policy and exposure to spot gold vs. contracted pricing
The e2e synthesis pegs composite fair value at $15.62 and signal-adjusted at $16.44, with DCF at $16.90, anchored P/E at $17.94, and an EPV floor of $10.74. All three methods cluster in the mid-teens, so this isn't a runaway single-method artifact - the price at $28.19 sits roughly 70% above the DCF and ~72% above composite. That gap is the market capitalizing today's spot-gold margins as if they persist, layered on a strong-quality business (score 42). Quality lifts deserved value, but not from $16 to $28 - the anchored P/E already reflects a healthy multiple. What has to go right: gold holds near current levels for years, unit costs don't drift, and the quiet share dilution doesn't compound. That is a stack of assumptions, not a margin of safety. Earnings quality is high, so I won't haircut deserved value further, but I also won't reward the stock with a premium above the anchored $17.94 just because 2025 margins exploded - a chunk of that is cyclical gold price, not durable operating improvement. Verdict: fully priced to richly priced, with the risk skewed to the downside if gold mean-reverts even modestly.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- Realized gold price assumption embedded in sell-side models vs spot
- All-in sustaining cost (AISC) trend and 2026 capex guidance
- Share count trajectory and any buyback authorization
- Mexico jurisdictional developments affecting Mulatos/discount rate
- Reserve replacement and grade at core Canadian assets
AGI is riding a moderate-intensity gold bull narrative - central bank buying, debasement fears, geopolitical fragmentation - that has driven the stock to a large premium versus DCF. The tape is neutral-to-mildly-positive (VIX 16, S&P near highs), which is a benign backdrop for a high-beta (1.33) cyclical miner that needs risk appetite to sustain its multiple. Momentum is strong (33% CAGR, +28.5pp 3yr excess), and gold-sector flows are the dominant force pressing this name upward. The story is doing the heavy lifting, not the fundamentals. Against that, the narrative is flagged fragile with low cult coefficient, meaning there is no true believer base to defend the stock if gold moderates. The recent Q2 print was mixed - production up sequentially but full-year guidance was lowered - a small crack that the tape has so far ignored because the gold macro trade is louder than single-name execution. Rates at 4.68% and a stretched market PE are a background headwind for equities broadly but are partially offset for gold miners, which benefit from the same debasement narrative. Net: real tailwind now, but a thin one - it lives or dies with the gold tape.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Gold price action and central bank buying flow data - the single biggest driver of this narrative
- Whether analyst targets get revised down after the guidance cut once the gold-trade noise fades
- Sector rotation signals - if generalist money exits miners for other cyclicals, the momentum bid disappears fast
- VIX regime change - a spike above 20 hits 1.33-beta names disproportionately
This lens hasn't been run for this ticker yet.
When we made this prediction on Aug 5, 2026, AGI was $28.76. We expect it to be $22.60 by Feb 2027, and we consider it great value under $18.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 5, 2026.
Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.