AG vs WPM Stock Comparison
WPM currently leads AG in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 47 vs 46. The clearest difference is quality, while AG has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between AG and WPM?
WPM leads the current stock comparison as Wheaton Precious Metals Corp., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
First Majestic Silver Corp. vs Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.
WPM leads
WPM leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors AG on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support WPM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
First Majestic Silver Corp.
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors WPM over AG, 47 versus 46 as of Oct 31, 2026. WPM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while AG holds the stronger value profile. WPM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AG. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WPM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. WPM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare First Majestic Silver Corp. and Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare AG and WPM against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality64 vs 80WPM +16
- Value41 vs 29AG +12
- Risk Resilience40 vs 46WPM +6
- Momentum33 vs 31Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor WPM. WPM’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; AG keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
WPM's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AG and WPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
WPM (Wheaton Precious Metals Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
AG (First Majestic Silver Corp.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 50.5% against 39.1%.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
WPMWPM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WPMWPM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AGAG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
WPMWPM on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
AGAG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors WPM, analyst targets favor AG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AG | WPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +84.8% | +41.4% | AG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +31.3% | +18.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 5 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WPM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 46 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | WPM | revenue growth -11.6% vs 4.5%; EPS growth -15.4% vs -4.8%; TTM ROE 12.4% vs 23%; gross margin 52.6% vs 77.3%; operating margin 44% vs 72.8% |
| Valuation | AG | Value 41 vs 29 |
| Technicals | WPM | Price vs 50-day -23% vs -18.4%; vs 200-day -21.2% vs -5.5% |
| Risk Resilience | WPM | Risk Resilience 40 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | AG | Target upside 84.8% vs 41.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AG and WPM and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on WPM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28WPM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- WPM +1
- 46 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- WPM +1
- 44 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- WPM +3
- 43 vs 46
- 90 sessions ago
- WPM +4
- 56 vs 60
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jul 9 when AG moved ahead of WPM.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only AG
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.36%)
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only WPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.68%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
WPM leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -6.98%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -5.42%, AIQ 0 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1AG closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to WPM's edge.
- 2AG's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3WPM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
WPM leads on balance| Metric | AG | WPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -11.6% | 4.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -15.4% | -4.8% |
| Gross margin | 52.6% | 77.3% |
| Operating margin | 44% | 72.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 12.4% | 23% |
| Debt to equity | 0.11 | 0.2 |
Performance
WPM leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AG | WPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.8% | -4.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -10.7% | -5.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.7% | 11.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.6% | 1.3% |
| Year to date | -5.2% | 7.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 23.1% | 29% |
Technicals
WPM has the stronger structure| Metric | AG | WPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 39.7 | 39 |
| ADX (14) | 29.9 | 27.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -23% | -18.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -21.2% | -5.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 50.5% | 39.1% |
Risk
WPM is the more resilient| Metric | AG | WPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.82 | 1.94 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.61 | 0.74 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.97 | 1.06 |
| Max drawdown | -53.9% | -37.6% |
| Current drawdown | -50.6% | -23.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 73.4% | 50.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.9% | -5.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AG or WPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, WPM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 47 against AG's 46. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. AG is not without a case — it holds the better value profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is AG or WPM the better buy right now?
WPM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor WPM over AG?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WPM leads Quality by 16 points; AG leads Value by 12 points; WPM leads Risk Resilience by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AG or WPM?
Analyst price targets imply +84.8% upside for AG and +41.4% for WPM, so the Street currently favors AG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors WPM. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, AG or WPM?
AG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, AG or WPM?
WPM on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, AG or WPM?
The two are level on Momentum. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, AG or WPM?
WPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WPM on Risk Resilience, by 6 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AG more profitable than WPM?
WPM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 52.6% vs 77.3%; operating margin 44% vs 72.8%; ttm roe 12.4% vs 23%.
Is WPM's lead over AG getting stronger or weaker?
WPM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-07-09, when AG moved ahead of WPM.
What would change the AG vs WPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AG closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to WPM's edge; AG's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; WPM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about AG and WPM?
AG: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. WPM: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on AG is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On WPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AG and WPM with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.