GFI Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

DRDGold has a net margin of -- compared to Gold Fields's net margin of --. Gold Fields's return on equity of 25.25% beat DRDGold's return on equity of 27.94%.

Gold Fields has a consensus price target of $23.00, signalling downside risk potential of -1.84%. On the other hand DRDGold has an analysts' consensus of $16.25 which suggests that it could grow by 6.7%. Given that DRDGold has higher upside potential than Gold Fields, analysts believe DRDGold is more attractive than Gold Fields.

Gold Fields has a beta of 0.561, which suggesting that the stock is 43.87% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison DRDGold has a beta of 0.387, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 61.346%.

Gold Fields has a quarterly dividend of $0.38 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.32%. DRDGold offers a yield of 1.81% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share. Gold Fields pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. DRDGold pays out 55.07% of its earnings as a dividend. DRDGold's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Gold Fields quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than DRDGold quarterly revenues of --. Gold Fields's net income of -- is lower than DRDGold's net income of --. Notably, Gold Fields's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.98x while DRDGold's PE ratio is 14.04x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Gold Fields is 4.03x versus 3.40x for DRDGold. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Harmony Gold Mining has a net margin of -- compared to Gold Fields's net margin of --. Gold Fields's return on equity of 25.25% beat Harmony Gold Mining's return on equity of 25.77%.

Gold Fields has a consensus price target of $23.00, signalling downside risk potential of -1.84%. On the other hand Harmony Gold Mining has an analysts' consensus of $15.81 which suggests that it could fall by -4.08%. Given that Harmony Gold Mining has more downside risk than Gold Fields, analysts believe Gold Fields is more attractive than Harmony Gold Mining.

Gold Fields has a beta of 0.561, which suggesting that the stock is 43.87% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Harmony Gold Mining has a beta of 1.006, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 0.596%.

Gold Fields has a quarterly dividend of $0.38 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.32%. Harmony Gold Mining offers a yield of 1.07% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.12 per share. Gold Fields pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Harmony Gold Mining pays out 16.74% of its earnings as a dividend. Harmony Gold Mining's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Gold Fields quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Harmony Gold Mining quarterly revenues of --. Gold Fields's net income of -- is lower than Harmony Gold Mining's net income of --. Notably, Gold Fields's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.98x while Harmony Gold Mining's PE ratio is 17.87x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Gold Fields is 4.03x versus 2.83x for Harmony Gold Mining. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Newmont has a net margin of -- compared to Gold Fields's net margin of 37.75%. Gold Fields's return on equity of 25.25% beat Newmont's return on equity of 16.89%.

Gold Fields has a consensus price target of $23.00, signalling downside risk potential of -1.84%. On the other hand Newmont has an analysts' consensus of $62.79 which suggests that it could grow by 14.98%. Given that Newmont has higher upside potential than Gold Fields, analysts believe Newmont is more attractive than Gold Fields.

Gold Fields has a beta of 0.561, which suggesting that the stock is 43.87% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Newmont has a beta of 0.307, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 69.325%.

Gold Fields has a quarterly dividend of $0.38 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.32%. Newmont offers a yield of 1.83% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share. Gold Fields pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Newmont pays out 34.2% of its earnings as a dividend. Newmont's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Gold Fields quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Newmont quarterly revenues of $5B. Gold Fields's net income of -- is lower than Newmont's net income of $1.9B. Notably, Gold Fields's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.98x while Newmont's PE ratio is 12.24x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Gold Fields is 4.03x versus 3.17x for Newmont. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Sibanye Stillwater has a net margin of -- compared to Gold Fields's net margin of --. Gold Fields's return on equity of 25.25% beat Sibanye Stillwater's return on equity of -15.35%.

Gold Fields has a consensus price target of $23.00, signalling downside risk potential of -1.84%. On the other hand Sibanye Stillwater has an analysts' consensus of $4.88 which suggests that it could fall by -1.33%. Given that Gold Fields has more downside risk than Sibanye Stillwater, analysts believe Sibanye Stillwater is more attractive than Gold Fields.

Gold Fields has a beta of 0.561, which suggesting that the stock is 43.87% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Sibanye Stillwater has a beta of 0.578, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 42.217%.

Gold Fields has a quarterly dividend of $0.38 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.32%. Sibanye Stillwater offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.11 per share. Gold Fields pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Sibanye Stillwater pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Gold Fields quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Sibanye Stillwater quarterly revenues of --. Gold Fields's net income of -- is lower than Sibanye Stillwater's net income of --. Notably, Gold Fields's price-to-earnings ratio is 16.98x while Sibanye Stillwater's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Gold Fields is 4.03x versus 0.57x for Sibanye Stillwater. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.