AAUC vs IAG: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

Same yardstick, side by side (as of August 2026). Valuation lined up like this is most meaningful for two names in the same corner of the market, which these are. Figures are approximate; verify before investing.

The metrics above tell you which is the marginally better business. The bigger risk for most people is not picking the slightly worse stock, it is over-concentrating. AAUC and IAG share themes, so owning both, or adding either to what you already hold, can quietly push a large share of your portfolio into one bet.

This is the part a generic comparison page cannot answer, because it depends on what you own. Connect your brokerage and Walnut shows your real, combined AAUC and IAG exposure, flags overlap with your existing positions, and tells you if adding one would tip you past a concentration you are comfortable with, read-only by default, with your login staying at your broker. Walnut is not an investment adviser.

Allied Gold Corporation (NYSE and TSX: AAUC) is a gold producer built by chairman and chief executive Peter Marrone, who previously founded Yamana Gold. The company came together in 2023 through the combination of several African gold assets and now runs the Sadiola mine in Mali plus the Cote d'Ivoire complex made up of the Agbaou and Bonikro operations. Its fourth asset, Kurmuk in the Benishangul-Gumuz region of Ethiopia, moved from construction toward first gold during 2026 and is the single largest swing factor in the company's production profile. Allied employed roughly 2,095 people as of its latest disclosure and reported second-quarter 2026 gold production of approximately 97,429 ounces, about 7% above the year-earlier quarter, at all-in sustaining costs of roughly $2,192 per ounce sold.

Full AAUC guide

IAMGOLD Corporation (NYSE: IAG, TSX: IMG) mines gold at three sites and reports in U.S. dollars. Cote Gold in northern Ontario is the growth asset, operated by IAMGOLD in a 70/30 partnership with Sumitomo Metal Mining, and is now one of the largest gold mines in production in Canada. Westwood in Quebec is a smaller, higher-cost underground operation held at 100%. Essakane in Burkina Faso is the cash engine, an open-pit mine in which IAMGOLD's interest was reduced from 90% to 85% in June 2025 when the state took a larger share. The Nelligan Mining Complex in Quebec is the main exploration project and takes roughly ~$24 million of the ~$54 million 2026 exploration budget. The company employs about ~3,700 people.

Full IAG guide

Both fit overlapping themes, but they are not interchangeable. The useful comparison is which set of drivers and risks you want exposure to.

• AAUC drivers: Kurmuk moving from capital sink to cash generator; Gold price leverage on a mid-cost portfolio.
• IAG drivers: Cote Gold throughput and the Q4 technical report; Gold price leverage, partly clawed back by royalties.

A faster-growing, richer-valued name usually swings harder, so it suits a longer horizon and a higher tolerance for volatility; a steadier, more cash-generative business suits a more conservative or income-minded investor. The honest test is which set of risks you could hold through a drawdown: Jurisdiction risk is the dominant concern: every producing ounce comes from Mali or Cote d'Ivoire, and the growth asset sits in Ethiopia, exposing Allied to fiscal-regime changes, permitting friction, security incidents and currency controls that a North American or Australian producer would not face. For IAG, roughly half of attributable production comes from Essakane in Burkina Faso, where the company states plainly that security incidents continue and that it incurs additional cost moving people, contractors and supplies to site.

Growth-minded investors who believe the theme has years to run tend to accept the richer multiple for more upside; value-minded investors lean toward the cheaper forward earnings and steadier profile. Pick AAUC if you believe its drivers more; IAG if you believe its. Many investors hold both, but since they share themes, that is a concentrated bet, not diversification. Decide deliberately and check overlap. For the full detail, see the AAUC and IAG guides.

AAUC. The valuation reads cheap on operating metrics and expensive on nothing: roughly 1.9 times sales and about 5.4 times EBITDA is a normal-to-low multiple for a mid-tier gold producer, and the forward price-to-earnings ratio near 3.7 reflects consensus expectations that Kurmuk plus a high gold price turn the reported loss into meaningful earnings. The gap between a 32% operating margin and a negative net margin is the number worth understanding, since it is driven by financing costs, taxes and non-operating items rather than by mine performance. Trailing free cash flow of roughly negative $110 million is a construction-phase artifact, not a run-rate, but it is why the balance sheet needed the Zijin placement.

IAG. The trailing multiple looks undemanding, but it is computed on earnings produced at a realized gold price of ~$4,631 per ounce in the first half, well above the ~$4,000 assumption the company used to set its own cost and royalty guidance. Adjusted EBITDA of ~$507.3 million in the quarter and mine-site free cash flow of ~$368.9 million are what retired the credit facility drawing and funded the buyback. Reported all-in sustaining cost of ~$2,271 per ounce is the number to track quarter to quarter, since it includes sustaining capital and royalties and therefore captures the full cost of keeping the ounces coming, unlike cash cost.

Headline figures (approximate, August 2026): AAUC shows market cap ~$2.8 billion, revenue (ttm) ~$1.49 billion, up ~56% year over year, operating income (ttm) ~$383 million (~32% operating margin), net income (ttm) ~-$63 million (EPS ~-$0.5); IAG shows revenue (ttm) ~$3.68 billion, reported in U.S. dollars, q2 2026 revenue ~$856.9 million, up ~47% year over year, all-in sustaining cost (q2 2026, incl. royalties) ~$2,271 per ounce sold, vs 2026 guidance of ~$2,000 to ~$2,150, adjusted eps ~$0.42 in Q2 2026; ~$1.98 trailing twelve months.

AAUC and IAG are related but distinct: same themes, different businesses and risks. Neither wins in the abstract; the right pick is whichever thesis you actually believe, sized so you are not over-concentrated in one theme. Walnut can show your combined AAUC and IAG exposure against your real portfolio. It is not an investment adviser.