MAG vs NGD Stock Comparison

Compare MAG and NGD across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.

Market data as of Sep 6, 2026 market close· AIQ score gap 6 points
MAG
Basic Materials
vs
NGD
Basic Materials
MAG
MAG Silver Corp.
Price
$24.47
Day move
-
AIQ Score
55/100
Best edge
Risk Resilience
Sector
Basic Materials
NGD
New Gold Inc.
Leads
Price
$9.08
Day move
-
AIQ Score
61/100
Best edge
Quality
Sector
Basic Materials

What is the main difference between MAG and NGD?

NGD leads the current stock comparison as New Gold Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

MAG Silver Corp. vs New Gold Inc.

Data as of Sep 6, 2026· market close· Basic Materials· Coverage 51/66 fields· Moderate confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 3/10

NGD leads

NGD leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from MAG.

Fragile: 2 of 5 evidence groups support NGD, and the lead recently changed hands.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 5Comparison trend: Reversed
MAG

MAG Silver Corp.

AIQ Score
55/100
AIQ Edge Score
6/10
NGD

New Gold Inc.

Leads
AIQ Score
61/100
AIQ Edge Score
8/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NGD over MAG, 61 versus 55 as of Sep 6, 2026. NGD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while MAG holds the stronger risk resilience profile. 2 of 5 covered evidence groups favor NGD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. NGD lead: Reversed — MAG led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NGD now leads by 6.

Compare MAG Silver Corp. and New Gold Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.

Performance over time

Price-return comparison using available daily close history.

MAG
+33.1%
NGD
+626.4%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000

MAG $13,306 · NGD $72,640

Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.

Compare MAG and NGD against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

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.

MAG advantage
0
NGD advantage
  • Quality30%40 vs 90
    NGD +50
  • Risk Resilience15%100 vs 52
    MAG +48
  • Value30%47 vs 36
    MAG +11

2 of 5 evidence groups favor NGD. NGD’s edge is concentrated in quality; MAG keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.

MAG0 AIQ

No factor moved materially.

No new signals fired.

NGD0 AIQ

No factor moved materially.

No new signals fired.

NGD's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MAG and NGD both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

NGD (New Gold Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.

MAG (MAG Silver Corp.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, value, valuation.

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

NGD

NGD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.

Growth

MAG

MAG on combined revenue and EPS growth.

Value

MAG

MAG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.

Momentum

Even

The two are level on Momentum.

Lower downside

MAG

MAG on Risk Resilience, by 48 points.

Analyst upside

NGD

NGD on implied upside to the consensus price target.

AIQ vs Wall Street

Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.

MeasureMAGNGDNote
Implied upside to target-10.1%+40.4%NGD has more room
Target dispersion0%0%Lower is tighter analyst agreement
ConsensusHoldBuyContext, not a primary driver
Analysts covering11Higher coverage generally improves confidence

Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

2 of 5 covered evidence groups favor NGD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreNGD55 vs 61
FundamentalsEvenEPS growth 17.9% vs 3.7%; TTM ROE 10.3% vs 64.8%
ValuationMAGValue 47 vs 36
TechnicalsNot coveredNot covered
Risk ResilienceMAGRisk Resilience 100 vs 52
Analyst expectationsNGDTarget upside -10.1% vs 40.4%

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MAG and NGD and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.

  • The AIQ gap is moderate at 6 points.
  • Only 2 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 NGD.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 Sep 5

NGD lead: Reversed — MAG led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NGD now leads by 6.

Apr 24MAG leads above the line · NGD leads belowSep 5
Today
NGD +6
55 vs 61
7 sessions ago
MAG +9
56 vs 47
30 sessions ago
MAG +9
56 vs 47
90 sessions ago
MAG +9
56 vs 47

The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when NGD moved ahead of MAG.

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.

MAG

No active signals

NGD

No active signals

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.

  1. 1MAG closes the Quality gap — currently 50 points behind, the largest single contributor to NGD's edge.
  2. 2MAG generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
  3. 3NGD starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
  4. 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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

Split
MetricMAGNGD
Revenue growth (YoY)0%10.5%
EPS growth (YoY)17.9%3.7%
Gross margin0%51.8%
Operating margin0%44.8%
Return on equity (TTM)10.3%64.8%
Debt to equity00.21

Performance

Split across windows
MetricMAGNGD
1 week (5 sessions)-15.3%
1 month (20 sessions)-14.6%
3 months (63 sessions)10.3%
6 months (126 sessions)41.2%
Year to date4.2%
1 year (252 sessions)170.2%

Technicals

Split
MetricMAGNGD
RSI (14)22.1
ADX (14)22.6
Price vs 50-day-18.6%
Price vs 200-day28%
Volatility (1M, annualized)69.9%

Risk

MAG is the more resilient
MetricMAGNGD
Beta2.35
Sharpe ratio7.572.12
Sortino ratio17.692.68
Max drawdown-3.2%-32.3%
Current drawdown-1.2%-32.3%
Annualized volatility28.1%65.8%
Value at risk (95%)-1.2%-6.9%

Straight answers

Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.

Which is better, MAG or NGD?

On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NGD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 61 against MAG's 55. The edge comes from quality. MAG is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 MAG or NGD the better buy right now?

NGD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.

Why does the AIQ Score favor NGD over MAG?

The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. NGD leads Quality by 50 points; MAG leads Risk Resilience by 48 points; MAG leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.

Which has more analyst upside, MAG or NGD?

Analyst price targets imply -10.1% upside for MAG and +40.4% for NGD, so the Street currently favors NGD. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.

Which is better value, MAG or NGD?

MAG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MAG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, MAG or NGD?

MAG 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, MAG or NGD?

The two are level on Momentum. Momentum carries 25% of 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, MAG or NGD?

MAG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MAG on Risk Resilience, by 48 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.

Is MAG more profitable than NGD?

NGD leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 0% vs 51.8%; operating margin 0% vs 44.8%; ttm roe 10.3% vs 64.8%.

Is NGD's lead over MAG getting stronger or weaker?

NGD lead: Reversed — MAG led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NGD now leads by 6. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-09-02, when NGD moved ahead of MAG.

What would change the MAG vs NGD verdict?

The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MAG closes the Quality gap — currently 50 points behind, the largest single contributor to NGD's edge; MAG generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; NGD starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.

What do the current signals say about MAG and NGD?

MAG: No active signals. NGD: No active signals.

Compare MAG and NGD with others

How this comparison is scored

The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.