What the ranking system surfaces when a stock simultaneously reaches the top across every scoring strategy.
Data snapshot as of 5/12/2026 — stock price will vary at time of reading
Aura Minerals reached the top position across the average of all four ranking strategies on the TGI Watchlist — Total Growth, Healthy Income, Price Growth, and Dividend Growth — simultaneously. That convergence is unusual. The Growth to Income correlation normally weakens as yield climbs past 6%, because the investable universe shifts toward pass-through structures (REITs, BDCs, MLPs) that require different scoring metrics. AUGO sits at a 4.80% four-year average yield, right in the zone where the two strategies still overlap, with price and dividend growth strong enough to dominate both sides at once.
Scores as of 5/12/2026:
Lower scores indicate higher purchase priority. Scores are calculated from each company's multi-timeframe price growth, dividend growth, yield characteristics, and payout discipline.
| Stock Price (5/12/2026) | $83.72 |
|---|---|
| Market Capitalization | $6.77B |
| Sector | Materials |
| Industry | Gold |
| Exchange | NASDAQ: AUGO (also B3: AURA33) |
| Headquarters | Coconut Grove, Florida (incorporated in Road Town, BVI) |
No, and that's part of the point. Aura Minerals was originally incorporated in 1946 and renamed from Aura Gold in 2007, but the version of the company that matters to investors today is much newer. The business re-IPO'd in 2020 on the Toronto and Brazilian exchanges, then listed on Nasdaq in July 2025 at $24.25 per share, raising $196 million. The AUGO ticker on Nasdaq is less than a year old as of this writing. The 10-year price growth in the snapshot reflects the predecessor listings (TSX: ORA, OTCQX: ORAAF) climbing from a near-zero base over the past decade.
This is the typical pattern with TGI rankings: the system surfaces companies whose numbers are exceptional regardless of whether you've heard of them. Brand recognition is not part of the scoring.
| 1-Year | 352.45% |
|---|---|
| 3-Year | 952.32% |
| 5-Year | 684.57% |
| 10-Year | 72,010.68% |
| 1-Year | 147.46% |
|---|---|
| 3-Year | 79.34% |
| 5-Year | 517.70% |
| 10-Year | 0.00% |
The 10-year dividend growth of 0.00% has a clean explanation: Aura wasn't paying meaningful dividends a decade ago. The current dividend story begins with the 2020 re-IPO. Since then, the company has maintained substantial distributions — combined dividend and share-buyback yields of 13.5% in 2021, 6% in 2022 and 2023, and 9.2% in the trailing twelve months reported in early 2025.
4-Year Average Yield: 4.80%. The current spot yield varies with price; the four-year average is what feeds the HII scoring component and reflects sustained payout strength rather than a moment-in-time snapshot.
Aura's dividend is formula-driven, not discretionary. Under the company's stated Dividend Policy, quarterly cash dividends equal 20% of reported Adjusted EBITDA for the period, less sustaining capital expenditures and exploration capital expenditures for the same period. Dividend growth is therefore mechanically tied to EBITDA growth, not to board sentiment about market conditions.
Recent quarterly dividends:
| Q4 2024 (paid March 2025) | $0.25 per share |
|---|---|
| Q2 2025 (paid August 2025) | $0.33 per share |
| Q3 2025 (paid November 2025) | $0.48 per share |
| Q4 2025 (paid March 2026) | $0.66 per share |
That's $0.25 to $0.66 in four quarters — a 164% increase in the quarterly dividend year-over-year, driven entirely by the EBITDA growth the formula tracks. Seeking Alpha maintains the full historical record: seekingalpha.com/symbol/AUGO/dividends/history.
10-Year Total Return: 94,792.94%. This compounds price appreciation with dividend reinvestment over the full predecessor-listing period.
Aura reported a GAAP net loss of approximately $79.3 million in 2025, which is the first thing skeptics will point to. That loss is entirely non-cash, driven by mark-to-market adjustments on gold collar hedges associated with Borborema's future production. The hedges aren't cash outflows; they're accounting marks on derivative positions that will roll off as the underlying production is realized. Excluding the non-cash hedge impact, Adjusted Net Income for 2025 was $205.7 million.
| 2025 GAAP Net Loss | -$79.3 million |
|---|---|
| 2025 Adjusted Net Income | $205.7 million |
| GAAP EPS (approx., basic) | -$0.95 per share |
| Adjusted EPS (approx., basic) | $2.46 per share |
Aura reports under IFRS as a foreign private issuer. The per-share figures above are calculated from net income divided by year-end share count of 83.5 million; the audited 20-F uses weighted-average diluted shares, which will produce numbers a fraction off these but in the same range.
2025 Operating Cash Flow was $305.2 million, up 37% year-over-year from $222.2 million in 2024. Full-year Recurring Free Cash Flow reached $253.7 million, up 30% year-over-year. That cash generation was large enough to fund the $179.4 million capex program and $115.8 million in dividends and buybacks without taking on debt — which is why net debt actually fell during a year of significant expansion. Q4 alone produced $94.2 million in Recurring Free Cash Flow, up 26% quarter-over-quarter and 40% year-over-year. This is the metric that matters for the dividend formula, because the dividend follows EBITDA-minus-capex, not GAAP income.
This is the most important section for understanding why AUGO ranks the way it does. The dividend formula creates a direct mechanical link between operating performance and shareholder distributions:
| 2023 Adjusted EBITDA | $135 million |
|---|---|
| 2024 Adjusted EBITDA | $270 million |
| 2025 Adjusted EBITDA | $547.8 million |
That's a doubling trajectory for two consecutive years. Because dividends are 20% of EBITDA minus capex, the dividend scales with it. Management has stated their target is to double EBITDA again in 2026. That target is driven by production growth — 280,414 GEO (gold-equivalent ounces) in 2025, with 2026 guidance of 360,000 to 390,000 GEO, a 28% to 39% step up — combined with realized gold prices that moved from approximately $3,068 per ounce in Q3 2025 to $4,090 per ounce in Q4 2025.
| Net Debt (end of 2025) | $117.6 million |
|---|---|
| Net Debt / LTM EBITDA | 0.28x |
| Credit Rating (S&P, global scale) | BB- (recently upgraded from B+) |
| Credit Rating (Brazilian national scale) | brAA+ (recently upgraded from brAA) |
Conservative leverage by any standard. 0.28x net debt to EBITDA is well below the threshold that typically concerns rating agencies, and the recent dual upgrades reflect a strengthening balance sheet alongside cash flow growth.
| 2024 Net Revenue | $594.2 million |
|---|---|
| 2025 Net Revenue | $921.7 million (+55.1% YoY) |
| 2025 Adjusted EBITDA Margin | 59% |
| 2025 Cash Costs (per GEO) | $1,136 |
| 2025 AISC (per GEO) | $1,458 |
At realized gold prices averaging $3,446 per ounce for the year and all-in sustaining costs of $1,458 per ounce, the spread between revenue and production cost is what's driving EBITDA acceleration.
Recent analyst consensus places the 12-month price target at approximately $86.99, with a range from $51 to $105 across 10 covering analysts and an average "Strong Buy" rating. The target sits roughly at recent trading levels, which is neutral information — neither validating nor invalidating the price action. This is presented as information, not endorsement. The TGI scoring system does not incorporate forward analyst targets, and historical results suggest consensus price targets are more often wrong than right, both above and below the eventual outcome.
| Mine | Country | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Minosa (San Andrés) | Honduras | Gold |
| Aranzazu | Mexico | Copper / Gold / Silver |
| Almas | Brazil (Tocantins) | Gold (open-pit, CIL processing) |
| Apoena (EPP complex) | Brazil (Mato Grosso) | Gold |
| Borborema | Brazil | Gold (commercial production declared Sept 2025) |
| Serra Grande (MSG) | Brazil (Goiás) | Gold (acquired December 2025) |
| Project | Location | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Era Dorada | Guatemala (Jutiapa) | Acquired via Bluestone Resources Jan 2025; Board-approved April 2026 |
| Matupá | Brazil (Mato Grosso) | Open-pit gold project, 100% owned |
| Marmato | Colombia (Caldas) | Currently in care and maintenance |
| Carajás | Brazil | Copper exploration, mineralization confirmed |
The TGI scoring system surfaces companies based on past performance. It is not a prediction of future returns. Aura Minerals carries several real risks that any reader should weigh independently of the scoring rank.
Commodity cycle exposure. Gold's run from approximately $2,000 to above $4,000 per ounce has done much of the EBITDA work. A sustained gold drawdown would compress dividends mechanically through the same formula that's expanding them now. A 20% formula applied to a smaller EBITDA produces a smaller dividend.
Sovereign and regulatory exposure. Operations span five Latin American jurisdictions. Mining is subject to permitting, environmental regulation, community license to operate, and resource nationalism in every country. Marmato's current care-and-maintenance status in Colombia is an example of how jurisdictional friction can take a producing asset offline.
GAAP losses two years running. The hedge accounting will continue to produce volatile GAAP results regardless of underlying cash flow performance. Readers who screen on GAAP profitability will exclude Aura. Investors who understand the hedge mechanics see a different picture.
Single-commodity concentration. Despite the Aranzazu copper-gold-silver operation, the business is dominated by gold. AUGO is not a diversified miner.
Newly listed on Nasdaq. The AUGO ticker has less than a year of trading history on its current exchange. Analyst coverage is still expanding, ETF inclusion is recent, and the shareholder base is still establishing itself. That can produce volatility unrelated to operational performance.
The Coordination Geometry framework reads any organization across four abstract fields — Tribal, Jurisdictional, Economic, and Cultural — with four pillars — Capital, Information, Innovation, and Trust — doing the structural work inside those fields. Fields define what can happen at each layer. Pillars determine what actually stabilizes. Aura Minerals is visible at all four field layers, and the pattern of which pillars stabilize which fields is more informative than any single financial metric.
Mining operations exist or fail at the Tribal field. The geology is fixed. The permission to extract from it is granted continuously by the surrounding community, and it can be withdrawn. The Era Dorada approval in April 2026 included Board authorization for an advanced water treatment system delivering potable water to the local community. Read as a coordination move, this is a Trust pillar commitment placed inside a Tribal field relationship. The commitment is dense (specific, costly, sustained), applicable (it touches daily life), and observable (the community can see whether the water actually flows). That is the structural shape of genuine validation, the kind that lowers coordination cost over time rather than the kind that merely performs cooperation.
The San Andrés operation in Honduras carries a deeper Tribal field complication. Artisanal mining there predates the modern operation by roughly a century. The meaning of "this is mining country" is not something the company invented, and it cannot be rescinded by corporate decree. Operating successfully in that context requires navigating an inherited Tribal field structure, not imposing a new one. The "mandala" and "360° Mining" language are attempts to name that integrated approach. Whether the language tracks the practice is the empirical question, and the substantive commitments (water infrastructure, sustained operational continuity, multi-decade presence) are where the evidence accumulates.
Operations span five sovereign jurisdictions: Brazil, Honduras, Mexico, Guatemala, and Colombia. This is real diversification at the Jurisdictional layer, not merely geographic spread. Each sovereign brings its own permitting regime, courts, currency, and regulatory cadence, and the company has to maintain credibility across all five simultaneously.
Two observations sharpen the pattern. At Borborema in Brazil, a single regulatory permission to relocate a road unlocked an additional 670,000 ounces of reserves. Those ounces were always physically present. The Jurisdictional field, not the geology, controlled whether they counted as reserves. At Marmato in Colombia, the inverse case holds. The asset sits in care and maintenance. Whatever the specific source of friction, a productive geological body is offline because the Jurisdictional field is not permitting activation. Both cases illustrate that for an extractive business, the binding constraint is rarely the rock.
Credit rating upgrades on both global (S&P BB-) and Brazilian national (brAA+) scales are Information pillar activations: external validators certifying that the company's commitments remain credible across multiple jurisdictions. Sustained ratings movement is the financial system's verification that Trust pillar commitments are being honored over time, transmitted through Information pillar infrastructure into a number that capital allocators can act on.
The Capital pillar runs the equation Stock × Velocity → Work. Aura's Dividend Policy operates this equation visibly. It distributes 20% of Adjusted EBITDA minus sustaining and exploration capex, calculated each quarter, without board discretion. This is the most diagnostic feature of the company from a Coordination Geometry standpoint.
Discretionary dividends operate on imagined-future logic. A board projects what the company can afford and pays from that projection. Formula-driven dividends operate on verified-present logic. The distribution comes from this quarter's actual results minus this quarter's actual reinvestment. The formula closes the loop between performance and payout without requiring trust in board judgment. It substitutes procedural commitment for discretionary commitment, which is the signature of wealth-based capital coordination at the corporate scale.
Net debt at 0.28x LTM EBITDA reinforces the same pattern. Conservative leverage means the company is coordinating from a verified-present stock position rather than from a leveraged claim on imagined future cash flows. Combined dividend-plus-buyback yields of 13.5%, 6%, 6%, and 9.2% across recent years represent capital returned from realized performance, not promised against future performance. These are present-tense distributions, the kind that can compound without requiring continuous renewal of belief in projections.
Gold occupies a unique position across human history. It was civilization's original attempt to anchor monetary stock in verified physical reality, to build a coordination layer that did not depend on anyone's promise. Gold is scarce, durable, divisible, and difficult to counterfeit. As a stock anchor it worked for centuries. Where it ultimately failed was at the velocity layer: physical gold moved too slowly for industrial-scale coordination, and the paper certificates introduced to solve the velocity problem opened a separation between stock and representation that sovereigns then exploited.
That history matters for reading a gold producer. The product itself preserves purchasing power without depending on a counterparty's promise. Every other monetary instrument requires somebody to make good on something. Gold does not. A gold producer is therefore producing wealth-coordination material, the same material civilization has reached for at every monetary crisis when promises started failing.
A tension worth naming sits at the brand layer. Aura's corporate language leans toward cyclical, integrated, non-extractive symbolism (the mandala, 360° Mining) attached to a business that is literally extractive. The most coherent reading is that the branding asserts an intention to operate the extraction itself as a wealth-coordination process: full community license, transparent permitting, sustained commitments, formula-driven payout, conservative balance sheet. The framework does not resolve whether intention tracks practice. It identifies the evidence that would resolve it. The pieces visible from the outside (the dividend formula, the credit rating trajectory, the water treatment commitment at Era Dorada, the multi-decade operational continuity at San Andrés, the multi-jurisdictional credibility) all point in the same direction. None of them individually decides the question. Together they constitute a measurable pattern.
This section is where TGI distinguishes itself from every other stock-spotlight page on the internet. The data is exceptional. The scores are #1 across all four strategies. And the rules say I can't buy more right now.
The Materials sector in my portfolio currently sits above the 10% sector concentration cap I apply across the portfolio. That gate stays closed until the overall portfolio grows enough that the existing Materials position falls back below the cap relative to total value, or until rebalancing — neither of which happens based on a single attractive name, no matter how attractive.
This is the discipline the framework is built around. The scoring system surfaces opportunities; the diversification rules govern action. When the two conflict — and they will, regularly — the rules win.
For readers whose Materials sector exposure has room, AUGO would currently sit at the top of the Buy List based on the rankings. For readers whose Materials exposure is at or above their own cap, the page is a demonstration of what the system surfaces — not a recommendation to bend the rules.
Discipline builds, speculation crashes.Total Growth Investing