NEXA RESOURCES S.A. (NEXA): what the price assumes
boothcheck covers NEXA RESOURCES S.A. (NEXA) but does not put one priced-in number on it: here the defensible answer is the evidence rather than a point estimate. boothcheck publishes no house fair value, target price, or buy/sell rating. Narrative composed 2026-06-27.
Generated: 2026-08-10 · Exported: 2026-08-12 · Source: https://boothcheck.com/report/NEXA
Headline
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Ticker | NEXA |
| Company | NEXA RESOURCES S.A. |
| Current price | $14.04/sh |
| Composition | Zinc 53% / Lead 18% / Copper 17% / Silver 4% / Other products 6% / Freight, insurance services and others 3% |
What The Price Assumes (Inversion)
The assumption today's price embeds, recovered by inverting the valuation.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Inversion basis | whole-company |
| Operating margin (value-band context) | 9.4% |
| Operating margin today | 16.6% |
| Margin compression (value-band) | -7.2pp |
| Multiple paid | 6x operating income |
The operating-margin figure is value-band context at year 12: derived from the framework's value band, a separate calculation — not part of the priced-in solve.
The price sits below what even a 5%/yr operating-profit decline would warrant; the inversion reports a bound, not a solved growth path.
Solve inputs: computed at a 7% cost of capital with 4% terminal growth over a 5-year stage (computed at the 7% minimum rate; the CAPM rate 6.1% sits below it).
How unusual the bet is: within-range (limited comparison data)
| Reference | Value |
|---|---|
| vs own history | +0.12σ |
| implied end-window share | 0% |
Valuation X-Ray
The price is supported by asset-based value, while earnings-power/growth-DCF land below the price. A value/asset-supported name, not a pure growth bet.
How the valuation models price the stock relative to the market price. Price/FV above 1.0 means the market pays more than that lens defends (expensive); at or below 1.0 the lens can defend the price.
| Family | Median price/FV | Models | Reads |
|---|---|---|---|
| Asset | 0.77x | 5 | justifies |
| Earnings | 4.84x | 3 | expensive |
| Relative | — | 0 | — |
| Growth | 1.72x | 2 | expensive |
Families that justify the price: Asset Families that call it expensive: Earnings, Growth
The models below discount at their own flat-beta convention rates (cost of equity 9.3%, WACC 9.5%); the inversion above states its own rate.
Per-Model Detail (n=10)
| Model | Family | FV | Price/FV | Applicable | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DCF Perpetual Growth | Growth | $0.00 | — | no | FCF base $0.0B, growth 4% (input: historical growth), terminal g 4.0%, WACC 9.5%, 5yr projection |
| DCF Exit Multiple | Growth | $6.74 | 2.08x | yes | Exit EV/EBITDA: 4.0x / 7.8x / 12.8x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull), 5yr |
| Relative Valuation | Relative | — | — | no | P/E 14x (static sector reference · 2026-04), scenarios: 10.5x / 14.0x / 16.8x (bear / base = reference held flat / bull), EV/EBITDA 8x |
| Simple DDM | Growth | — | — | no | — |
| Two-Stage DDM | Growth | — | — | no | — |
| Simple Excess Return | Asset | $18.21 | 0.77x | yes | BV/sh $9.74, ROE (TTM) 17.3%, ke 9.3% |
| Two-Stage Excess Return | Asset | $24.59 | 0.57x | yes | 5yr excess ROE then converge to ke=9.3% |
| Discounted Future Market Cap | Growth | $10.42 | 1.35x | yes | Rev $3.0B, growth 4% (input: historical growth; tapered), Terminal P/S: 0.5x / 0.6x / 0.7x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull, cap 6x) |
| Growth-Adjusted P/E | Relative | — | — | no | — |
| Margin Trajectory | Growth | — | — | no | — |
| Earnings Power Value | Earnings | $2.90 | 4.84x | yes | Normalized EBIT (5y avg op income, one-time charges added back) $0.29B × (1−21%) / WACC 9.5% → EPV (no growth) |
| Residual Income | Asset | $24.65 | 0.57x | yes | BV $9.74 + 5yr PV of (ROE (TTM) 17.3% − Kₑ 9.3%) × BV; BV grows 8.8%/yr |
| Graham Number | Asset | $14.80 | 0.95x | yes | √(22.5 × EPS $1.00 × BVPS $9.74) — Graham's conservative floor |
| EV/EBITDA Relative | Relative | — | — | no | EBITDA $0.50B × sector EV/EBITDA 8.0x |
| FCF Yield | Earnings | $0.01 | 1404.00x | yes | FCF $13.1M / Kₑ 9.3% — zero-growth perpetuity (excluded from median) |
| SBC-Adj FCF Yield | Earnings | — | — | no | — |
| Ben Graham Formula | Earnings | $0.84 | 16.71x | yes | EPS $1.00 × (8.5 + 2×-5.0%) × (4.4 / 5.3%) |
| ROIC-Justified P/B | Asset | $12.30 | 1.14x | yes | BV $9.74 × (ROIC 12.0% / WACC 9.5%) |
| P/Sales Sector | Relative | — | — | no | Revenue $3.00B × sector P/S 1.5x |
| PEG Fair Value | Relative | — | — | no | — |
| Earnings Yield | Earnings | $10.81 | 1.30x | yes | EPS $1.00 / required return 9.3% (Rf 4.3% + ERP 5.0%) |
| Funds From Operations Multiple | Relative | — | — | no | — |
| Clinical Phase NPV | Growth | — | — | no | — |
| Merton | Asset | — | — | no | — |
| V5 Mechanical | — | — | — | no | — |
Economic-Unit Decomposition (Sum Of The Parts)
One or more material disclosed units has unresolved economics. Unknown/general is not evidence of homogeneity: segment SOTP is primary but incomplete, consolidated cash flow may remain only a secondary cross-check when every unit shares an enterprise basis, and one sector multiple or target margin is withheld.
| Unit | Role | Valuation basis | Revenue | Reported profit | Value evidence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zinc (LME) | operating | enterprise | 2.9B reported-currency | — | withheld | unresolved no unit value |
| Copper (LME) | operating | enterprise | 9.9B reported-currency | — | withheld | unresolved no unit value |
| Silver (LBMA) | operating | enterprise | 0.0B reported-currency | — | withheld | unresolved no unit value |
| Gold (Fix) | operating | enterprise | 3.4B reported-currency | — | withheld | unresolved no unit value |
No total common-equity value is stated. One or more material units lack a supported unit value. The displayed values are an indicative subtotal; consolidated debt and cash cannot be applied to a fraction of the company.
Solvency
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Net debt | $1.2b |
| Net debt / NOPAT (after-tax) | 3.01x |
| Net debt / operating income (pre-tax) | 2.38x |
| Interest coverage | 1.6x |
| Share count CAGR (dilution) | 0.0% |
| Burning cash | no |
Bullet Takeaways
Nexa Resources is a Latin American zinc miner and smelter, with revenue led by zinc at about 53% and the rest in lead, copper, and silver. The capital-allocation picture is the heart of the story: the company carries net debt of about $1.13 billion against trailing operating income near $983 million, roughly 1.1x, but interest coverage is thin at about 1.1x, so deleveraging and disciplined investment are the priorities.
At $14.24 (June 27, 2026) the price pays only about 6x company-wide operating income, low enough to sit below what even a 5%-per-year operating-profit decline would warrant. The asset-based and peer-multiple frames support the price while the earnings-power and growth methods call it expensive, so the read is value and asset-supported, not a growth bet.
The most recent quarter was strong on a commodity-price tailwind, with adjusted EBITDA up about 126% and a margin near 32%. The cheapness reflects a leveraged, cyclical miner whose fortunes track metal prices it does not control.
Bull Case
How Nexa deploys its cash is the clearest window into where management sees value, and right now the priority is unmistakable: strengthen the balance sheet and ramp the assets that lift production at low cost. The company carries net debt of about $1.13 billion, and with interest coverage thin, every dollar of the cash flow now pouring in from higher metal prices is most valuable applied to reducing leverage and funding the mines that are scaling. That is a disciplined, deleveraging-first allocation stance, and it is the right one for a cyclical miner that wants to survive the next downturn and compound through it.
The operational results give that strategy real cash to work with. In the most recent quarter adjusted EBITDA more than doubled year over year to $283 million at a margin near 32%, and net income was $118 million, or $0.67 per share. Mining zinc production reached 79,000 tons, up 18% as all five mines benefited from better ore grades, and the Aripuana mine hit a quarterly record of 13,000 tonnes of zinc, signaling the operational stability that was the key question after its ramp. Crucially, mining cash cost net of byproducts was negative $0.76 per pound, below guidance, meaning the byproduct credits from copper, silver, and gold are effectively paying for the zinc production. A miner producing at negative cash cost is the lowest-risk position in the industry.
The customer base and the project pipeline round out the case. Nexa's zinc demand is highly diversified, with 81.9% of 2025 sales going to galvanizing, die casting, and related industrial uses across transport, construction, and infrastructure (FY2025 20-F, accession 0001292814-26-001787), so it is not dependent on a single end market. The next capital-allocation decision, Phase 2 of Cerro Pasco to integrate two mines and lift ore output, is under evaluation with an update expected in the second half of 2026, a potential growth catalyst funded from the current cash flow. At about 6x operating income, the price asks for decline; a stable-to-rising metal-price environment plus a deleveraging, well-run asset base is the value-and-asset-supported setup the methods describe.
Bear Case
The advantage a commodity miner relies on is its cost position, and the honest observation is that Nexa has no moat beyond it, so the thesis is only as good as metal prices and ore grades stay favorable, both of which erode over time. The spectacular recent results came from a price surge, copper up 38%, zinc up 14%, silver up 157%, and gold up 69% year over year, and from strong byproduct grades that drove cash cost negative. Those are cyclical tailwinds, not durable advantages. As ore bodies deplete, grades typically decline and cash costs rise, and as commodity prices mean-revert, the byproduct credits that are currently subsidizing zinc production shrink. The 6x multiple is cheap on peak earnings and would not look cheap on normalized ones.
The balance sheet is the amplifier of that cyclicality. Net debt of about $1.13 billion is only around 1.1x current operating income, but interest coverage is just 1.1x, which is dangerously thin for a business whose cash flow swings with metal prices. In a strong price environment Nexa services its debt comfortably; in a downturn, with prices falling and costs rising as grades normalize, that coverage could compress quickly, leaving little room for the deleveraging the company needs. A leveraged miner at the favorable end of the commodity cycle is exactly the profile that looks safest right before it is not.
The valuation evidence reflects the tension. The earnings-power and growth-DCF frames both call the stock expensive, because the current 8.6% trailing operating margin is thin and the methods do not credit the cyclical EBITDA surge as durable. Only the asset-based and peer-multiple frames support the price, and they do so on the value of the resource base rather than on sustainable earnings. The Aripuana ramp and Cerro Pasco expansion add execution and capital risk on top of the price risk. The bear case is straightforward: this is a cheap, leveraged, cost-position-dependent miner at a cyclical high, where a reversal in metal prices or a rise in mining costs would hit margins, coverage, and the multiple together.
Valuation
At the current price the market is paying about 6x company-wide operating income, a multiple so low that the price sits below what even a 5%-per-year operating-profit decline would warrant. That is a bound, not a solved point: computed at a 7% cost of capital floor (the CAPM rate of 5.9% sits below it) with 4% terminal growth, the price does not require growth, only that operating profit not fall faster than a modest decline. On that basis the stock screens deeply cheap.
The family pattern, though, is split in a telling way. The asset-based and relative-multiple methods support the price, valuing Nexa on its resource base and peer comparison, while the earnings-power and growth-DCF methods call it expensive. That divergence is the signal: the value case rests on the assets and the cheap multiple, not on sustainable earnings, because the current operating margin is thin and the recent EBITDA surge is cyclical. The reverse-DCF carries no reliability flag here, a caution that the inputs are volatile, which is itself characteristic of a commodity producer.
The judgment hinges on the metal-price assumption you are willing to make. At 6x, the price is cheap relative to current earnings, and if zinc, copper, and the precious-metal byproducts hold, Nexa generates strong cash that pays down debt and funds growth, and the asset-supported value is real. If prices revert and ore grades normalize, the same 6x applies to a much smaller earnings base, the thin interest coverage tightens, and the cheapness evaporates. This is less a valuation question than a commodity-cycle and balance-sheet question, and the low multiple is the market pricing exactly that risk.
Catalysts
The most recent print, Q1 2026, was strong on a commodity-price tailwind: adjusted EBITDA more than doubled year over year to $283 million at a margin near 32%, with net income of $118 million, or $0.67 per share, though the EPS reportedly missed expectations and the stock reacted negatively. Mining zinc production rose 18% to 79,000 tons on better ore grades across all five mines, Aripuana hit a record 13,000 tonnes of zinc, and mining cash cost net of byproducts was negative $0.76 per pound, below guidance, helped by copper up 38%, zinc up 14%, silver up 157%, and gold up 69% year over year.
The key forward catalyst is the Cerro Pasco Phase 2 decision, which would integrate two mines and lift ore output, with management expecting to update the market in the second half of 2026 on how it plans to manage the next stage. The continued ramp and stability of Aripuana is the other operational catalyst, since it is the swing producer for zinc volumes.
The dominant external catalysts are metal prices, particularly zinc, copper, and the precious-metal byproducts, which drive margins and cash flow. The watch items are zinc and byproduct prices, ore grades and cash costs, production volumes at Aripuana, the Cerro Pasco capital decision, and progress on reducing the debt load given the thin interest coverage. Sustained metal prices with continued deleveraging would support the value case; a price reversal or a cost increase would expose the cyclicality and leverage. Sources: Nexa Resources Q1 2026 results and earnings coverage (stocktitan.net; investing.com; finance.yahoo.com; theglobeandmail.com), 2026.
Peer Cohorts (Per Segment, With Filing Citations)
Zinc (LME) / Copper (LME) +2 more (reported)
- FCX (Freeport-McMoRan Inc.)
- FY2025 10-K: …feasibility studies for the development of a potential mill project, which would require significant additional capital investment to bring the associated copper to production (refer to "Operations - El Abra" for further discussion). c. PTFI has commenced long-term mine development activities for the Kucing Liar…
- FY2025 10-K: 47 343 0.15 - - - Bagdad 100% Mill 2,129 2,129 0.34 - a 0.02 1.41 439 439 0.31 - a 0.02 1.27 ROM leach 11 11 0.33 - - - 8 8 0.24 - - - Safford, including Lone Star 100% Crushed leach 513 513 0.45 - - - 138 138 0.41 - - - ROM leach 194 194 0.31 - - - 79 79 0.26 - - - Sierrita 100% Mill 1,798 1,798 0.23 - a 0.03 1.09…
- SCCO (SOUTHERN COPPER CORPORATION)
- FY2025 10-K: 153.3 481.8 ( 4.6 ) 477.2 Total $ 7,623.0 $ 807.8 $ 5,247.6 $ 13,678.4 $ ( 258.5 ) $ 13,420.0 Year Ended December 31, 2024 Mexican Mexican IMMSA Peruvian Segment Corporate, Other & Total (in…
- FY2025 10-K: - - Zinc 80.3 80.3 - - Total $ 2,366.3 $ 2,366.2 $ 0.1 $ - Fair Value at Measurement Date Using: Significant Fair Value Quoted prices in other Significant as of active markets for observable unobservable…
- NEM (NEWMONT CORPORATION)
- FY2025 10-K: …Resource Indicated Resource Measured and Indicated Resource Inferred Resource Deposits/Districts Newmont Share Tonnage (000 tonnes) Grade (Zn%) Tonnes (3) (000) Tonnage (000 tonnes) Grade (Zn%) Tonnes (3) (000) Tonnage (000 tonnes) Grade (Zn%) Tonnes (3) (000) Tonnage (000 tonnes) Grade (Zn%) Tonnes (3) (000)…
- FY2025 10-K: …Indicated Resource Inferred Resource Deposits/Districts Newmont Share Tonnage (000 tonnes) Grade (Pb%) Tonnes (3) (000) Tonnage (000 tonnes) Grade (Pb%) Tonnes (3) (000) Tonnage (000 tonnes) Grade (Pb%) Tonnes (3) (000) Tonnage (000 tonnes) Grade (Pb%) Tonnes (3) (000) Metallurgical Recovery (3) Peñasquito, Mexico…
- B (BARRICK MINING CORP)
- FY2025 40-F: …the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes x No ¨ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Emerging growth company ¨ If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate…
- FY2025 40-F: 99.8 Consent of Richard Peattie 99.9 Consent of Peter Jones 99.10 Consent of Joel Holliday 99.11 Certification of Mark Hill required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a), pursuant to Section 302 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 99.12 Certification of Graham Shuttleworth required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a),…
- KGC (KINROSS GOLD CORP)
- FY2025 40-F: . Emerging Growth Company ☐ If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards† provided pursuant to…
- FY2025 40-F: …report on Form 40-F, include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to our guidance for production, cost guidance, including production costs of sales, all-in sustaining cost of sales, and capital expenditures; anticipated returns of capital to shareholders, including the declaration, payment, increase and…
- HMY (HARMONY GOLD MINING COMPANY LIMITED)
- FY2025 20-F: …and we may have used Ton(s) and Tonne(s) interchangeably) Trend : the arrangement of a group of ore deposits or a geological feature or zone of similar grade occurring in a linear pattern. Unconformity: the structural relationship between two groups of rock that are not in normal succession. Waste : ore rock mined…
- FY2025 20-F: …3 ........................................................................................................ Metric tonne per cubic meter U ............................................................................................................ Uranium US$/oz…
Methodology Note
- Priced-in inversion: the valuation is inverted on the current price to recover the operating-income growth, duration, and steady-state margin the price embeds (ROE for financials, FFO growth for REITs).
- Valuation x-ray: the valuation models, grouped into four families (asset, earnings, relative, growth). Each model is expressed as a price/FV ratio (distance from price), not a point fair-value estimate. The spread across families is the disagreement.
- Economic-unit decomposition (SOTP): each disclosed business unit is assigned its native valuation basis before any multiple is applied. Operating units are valued on enterprise value; funded financial units are valued on their own common equity, because their borrowings fund earning assets rather than levering the parent. A company total is stated only once every material unit carries a supported value and the parent capital bridge reconciles.
- Solvency: net cash/debt, net-debt-to-NOPAT, interest coverage, and share-count CAGR from EDGAR financials (net debt / FFO and fixed-charge coverage for REITs; regulatory-capital framing for financials).
- Peer cohorts: per-segment comparables with deep-linkable SEC filing citations.
Fundamentals sourced from SEC EDGAR filings. Current price from Databento. The priced-in inversion and valuation x-ray are computed by the boothcheck engine; narrative composed by AI from the structured data.