Aris Mining (ARIS) — Stock Analysis 2026 [3.9]

Analysis as of 7 September 2026. Fundamentals come from Aris Mining’s FY2025 Annual Information Form and audited financial statements, its interim statements and MD&A to 30 June 2026, and its named technical reports; market data is the 4 September 2026 close and will move. Rating: ★★★★, Solid — Undervalued; against the blend below, the market is pricing roughly US$3,060/oz gold in perpetuity. Price deck: base gold US$4,000/oz — the representative trailing average snapped to the fixed US$3,000–5,000 grid — with every grid price run as a scenario (deep bear US$3,000 / bear US$3,500 / base US$4,000 / bull US$4,500 / deep bull US$5,000) and the LBMA analyst-survey deck as a 0% cross-check; no spot price, so the valuation does not age with the daily quote. All figures are US dollars. Refreshed on each annual report and on material events. For information only, prepared with AI assistance — see the disclaimer at the end.

Aris Mining runs two of the highest-grade underground gold mines in the Americas — Segovia’s reserves average 10.70 g/t, five times a typical open-pit senior’s grade — while assembling two of South America’s largest undeveloped gold projects behind them. A self-funding, effectively debt-free Colombian producer is nearly doubling output through two funded expansions, with a US$2.7 billion prefeasibility project and a US$1.8 billion preliminary-assessment project in the wings, and the market pays roughly what the two operating mines alone are worth. Net debt fell from US$241 million to US$44 million in eighteen months while trailing adjusted EBITDA reached US$690 million, and Marmato’s new plant pours first gold this quarter. To screen every listed gold producer on AISC, reserve life and net debt/EBITDA, go to Metal Pilot.

1. Snapshot & thesis

Aris Mining Corporation (TSX: ARIS; NYSE: ARIS) is a gold producer/operator headquartered jointly in Vancouver and Bogotá; it uplisted its US line to the New York Stock Exchange on 19 February 2026, changing its symbol from ARMN to ARIS. By archetype it is a producer — all nine scorecard dimensions apply at the reference weighting (Section 9) — carrying a material development pipeline valued sum-of-the-parts alongside the two mines (Section 7). Sector class: precious-metal miner. It operates the Segovia and Marmato underground mines in Colombia, which produced 256,503 oz in 2025, and owns 100% of the high-grade Soto Norte project in Colombia and the large-scale Toroparu project in Guyana. (AISC = all-in sustaining cost per ounce sold; P&P = proven & probable reserves; M&I = measured & indicated resources; NPV5% = after-tax net present value at 5%; CMP = contract mining partner.)

Figure 1. Aris Mining at a glance

Figure data: Aris Mining Q2 2026 MD&A , 29 July 2026, for the H1 2026 cost, cash and net-debt figures; Aris Mining delivers strong 2025 gold production above guidance mid-point , 21 January 2026, for FY2025 production and 2026 guidance; FY2025 annual financial statements (Form 40-F) , 11 March 2026, for FY2025 revenue. Market data per stockanalysis.com , 4 September 2026 close. Reserves per Table 2 (this analysis, aggregated from the named per-asset sources). Rating per Section 9, valuation read per Section 7.

Table 1. Aris Mining in numbers

Source: Aris Mining Q2 2026 MD&A and interim financial statements , both 29 July 2026, for the H1 2026 operating, cost, share-count and balance-sheet lines; FY2025 Form 40-F , 11 March 2026, for FY2025 revenue; stockanalysis.com , 4 September 2026, for market data and the six-analyst consensus target. Listed: Public (TSX: ARIS; NYSE: ARIS), a member of the S&P/TSX Composite Index.

Thesis in brief. Bull: two high-grade, cash-generative Colombian mines are self-funding two expansions toward ~500,000 oz/yr, net debt is effectively gone, and a fully-owned pipeline carries US$4.5 billion of company-published study value at the studies’ own conservative decks — while the market pays roughly what the operating mines alone are worth. Bear: every ounce comes from one country, Colombia was cut to BB− in April 2026, unit costs are rising with a 13% stronger peso, and the only observable transaction on Soto Norte valued it at a fraction of any study-based number. What tips it: whether Marmato ramps on schedule and whether Soto Norte clears environmental licensing.

How to read this analysis: here for the verdict? The statcards above and the rating in Section 9 are the whole story. Want the evidence? Read Section 2 (the assets) through Section 7 (the valuation).

2. Assets & operations

Aris sits entirely downstream of the gold price with no meaningful by-product credits, so every dollar of margin tracks bullion. Gold’s 2026 has been violent: an all-time high above US$5,500/oz in late January, a low of US$3,979/oz on 1 July, and a close of US$4,431/oz at end-August. For the market behind that, see the Gold — A Complete Market Guide .

2.1 Portfolio overview

Table 2. Asset portfolio, 7 September 2026

Source: Aris Mining 2025 Annual Information Form , 11 March 2026 — Segovia AIF §6.1 Tables 6.1.3–6.1.4, Marmato AIF §6.2 Tables 6.2.1–6.2.2, Soto Norte AIF §6.3 Tables 6.3-1 and 6.3-2 with the economic evaluation in Table 6.3-9, Toroparu AIF §6.4 Tables 6.4-2 and 6.4-10. All reserve and resource figures are estimates under NI 43-101 with the effective dates shown; M&I resources are reported inclusive of reserves. Marmato’s estimates are the most dated in the portfolio and are flagged as such throughout. Every asset is wholly owned and operated by Aris Mining; none has a third-party operator. Two are encumbered by Wheaton Precious Metals streams, stated at their filed terms in §2.4 and §2.6.

Concentration read. Every ounce comes from two mines in two adjoining Colombian departments — a concentration Sections 6 and 9 return to. Segovia alone is 89.6% of H1 2026 segment revenue and 26% of enterprise net asset value; the two projects hold 12.3 Moz of M&I resources between them.

2.2 Revenue split — by metal & by asset

Figure 2. H1 2026 revenue by metal

Figure data: Aris Mining interim financial statements, six months ended 30 June 2026 , 29 July 2026, statement of income and segment note 5. Gold revenue is Segovia $613.4 m plus Marmato $71.4 m; the balance is lead and zinc concentrate and silver credited within the Segovia polymetallic circuit.

Figure 3. H1 2026 revenue by asset

Figure data: Aris Mining interim financial statements , 29 July 2026, segment note 5. Soto Norte and Toroparu are pre-revenue segments and contribute nothing to either split.

2.3 Segovia — the high-grade cash engine (Antioquia, Colombia)

Segovia is Aris’s largest and highest-margin producing asset: 227,762 oz in FY2025 and 130,991 oz in H1 2026 (+32%), from 377,850 tonnes at 11.24 g/t and 95.5% recoveries, aided by the second ball mill commissioned in June 2025 that lifted capacity to 3,000 tpd. The estimate effective 28 November 2025 puts proven & probable reserves at 1.50 Moz at 10.70 g/t and measured & indicated resources at 3.63 Moz at 15.30 g/t, plus 2.86 Moz inferred.

Its distinctive feature is the Contract Mining Partner (CMP) programme: roughly 2,500 formalised small-scale miners work within and adjacent to Aris’s titles and sell their material to the Company. CMP feed was 33% of the mill and 43,162 of the 130,471 ounces sold in H1 2026, at $2,686/oz AISC against owner mining’s $1,623/oz — but on a purchase price indexed to gold, delivering a 43% AISC sales margin against guidance of 35–40%. Combined AISC was $1,974/oz, up 21% on price-linked royalties, sustaining capital and a 13% stronger peso.

2026 guidance targets 265,000–300,000 oz at an owner-mining cash cost of $1,150–1,250/oz and AISC of $1,700–1,800/oz, the CMP margin at 35–40%, struck on a disclosed US$4,400/oz gold price and 3,800 COP/USD. The state royalty is 4% on 80% of payable gold and silver — 3.57% of Segovia’s gold revenue in H1 2026 — and social contributions 3.43%. The key asset-level risk is formalisation dependency: a third of the ounces flow through the CMP structure (Section 6).

2.4 Marmato — the bulk-mining transformation (Caldas, Colombia)

Marmato produced 28,741 oz in FY2025 and 17,058 oz in H1 2026 from its 1,000-tpd flotation plant, but the story is under construction. The new 5,000-tpd carbon-in-pulp (CIP) plant — centrepiece of the prefeasibility study effective 30 June 2022, which outlined 3.18 Moz of proven & probable reserves at 3.16 g/t, a 20-year life and 2,985.6 koz recovered — is on schedule for first gold in Q4 2026. Aris plans to exit 2026 at ~3,000 tpd and reach full design capacity by end-2027; the stated steady-state rate is ~200,000 oz/yr.

Remaining capital is small and disclosed: approximately US$118 million to first gold as at 1 July 2026, of which US$42 million arrives as Wheaton’s final instalment in Q3 2026. Marmato is encumbered by the Wheaton Marmato precious-metals purchase agreement: US$175 million upfront in tranches (US$133 million received) against 10.5% of gold production until 310,000 oz have been delivered, then 5.25% for life, and 100% of silver until 2.15 Moz, then 50%, at 18% of spot until the uncredited upfront is exhausted and 22% thereafter. Colombian tax and royalties are assessed as though all gold were sold at market prices, so the stream cuts revenue but not the tax base: Marmato realised $4,327/oz in H1 2026 against Segovia’s $4,701/oz — 92.0%. The key asset-level risk is commissioning and ramp execution, compounded by reserve figures now four years old (Section 6).

2.5 Soto Norte — the high-grade pipeline flagship (Santander, Colombia)

Soto Norte is Aris’s largest single value driver on paper. The prefeasibility study effective 18 August 2025 models a 3,500-tpd underground mine producing ~230,000 oz/yr of gold over an eleven-year life, on 3.3 Moz of P&P reserves at 5.72 g/t within 6.7 Moz M&I at 5.83 g/t — a resource grade above Segovia’s in the M&I category. Study economics: US$2.68 billion after-tax NPV₅ and 33.5% IRR at US$2,600/oz, against US$1.4 billion of initial capital. Aris consolidated 100% in April 2025 by acquiring Mubadala’s 49% for US$100 million in cash and 26.1 million shares — an implied US$408 million for the half, or ~US$816 million for the whole against a US$2.68 billion study NPV, a 70% discount that is itself a market read on the approvals risk.

The approvals position is what matters. In hand: the mining title and the technical studies. Outstanding: the environmental licence — the impact assessment and application were “nearing completion” at 29 July 2026, having been targeted for Q2 2026, so the licence has not been applied for, and there is no financing and no construction decision. The project sits in the Santurbán páramo, where Colombia’s constitutional court blocked the predecessor Angostura project for over a decade. The design answers part of that — cyanide- and mercury-free processing, underground grouting, 750 tpd of the 3,500-tpd plant reserved for local contract mining partners — but the licence is not in hand, and that is the portfolio’s largest asset-level risk.

2.6 Toroparu — the large-scale option in Guyana

Toroparu is Aris’s first asset outside Colombia and its earliest-stage material project. The preliminary economic assessment effective 21 October 2025 outlined 126.9 Mt of measured & indicated resources at 1.30 g/t (5.31 Moz) plus 22.9 Mt inferred at 1.60 g/t (1.18 Moz), supporting a 7.0 Mtpa open pit over a 21.3-year life averaging 235 koz/yr, at a cash cost of $826/oz and AISC of $1,289/oz, for initial capital of US$820 million. At the study’s US$3,000/oz base the after-tax NPV5% is US$1,805 million on a 25.2% IRR, with a printed sensitivity from US$944 million at US$2,400/oz to US$2,664 million at US$3,600/oz and NPV at 0%, 5% and 10%.

This is a preliminary assessment, not a reserve: it includes inferred resources too speculative geologically to be classified as reserves, and no reserve has been booked. A prefeasibility study is on schedule for H2 2026 ahead of a construction decision targeted for early 2027. The mining licence has not been issued. Toroparu is encumbered by the Wheaton Toroparu agreement: 10% of gold and 50% of silver for US$153.5 million, of which US$15.5 million has been received and US$138 million is contingent on Wheaton electing to proceed — if it declines, Aris either refunds US$13.5 million and the agreement terminates, or the gold stream falls to 0.909% and silver to nil. The assessment models the stream as proceeding, charging US$1,356 million of stream losses against a US$138 million credit. The key asset-level risk is stage risk itself: least advanced, no reserves, no licence, no operating history in the jurisdiction.

2.7 Production, reserves & costs (consolidated)

Consolidated FY2025 gold production of 256,503 oz (+22% over 210,995 oz) exceeded the guidance midpoint, and H1 2026 delivered 148,049 oz, up 31%. 2026 guidance of 300,000–350,000 oz implies a further 17–36%; the stated medium-term target is ~500,000 oz/yr once both expansions ramp, with a longer-term ~1 million oz/yr ambition the Company qualifies as contingent on permits neither project holds.

Portfolio-wide, P&P reserves total ~9.3 Moz and M&I resources ~21.9 Moz (Table 2), plus ~10.7 Moz inferred. The resource-to-reserve gap is the largest unpriced asset here: exclusive measured and indicated ounces at the two producing mines total 4.94 Moz, more than the 4.68 Moz of reserves they carry — which is why Section 7 values them as their own line. The November 2025 Segovia update added 389 koz gross against 228 koz mined, a 1.7× replacement ratio; Marmato’s reserve has not been restated since 2022.

2.8 Peer positioning

Aris is scored against Americas-focused intermediate gold producers: Lundin Gold (TSX: LUG), single-asset Fruta del Norte in Ecuador; Torex Gold (TSX: TXG), the Morelos complex in Mexico; and Equinox Gold (TSX/NYSE: EQX), multi-country Americas, which absorbed Orla Mining on 31 July 2026. None is under an announced, unclosed transaction.

Table 3. Peer positioning — Americas-focused gold producers

Source: Lundin Gold 2026 guidance ; Torex Gold 2026 operational guidance ; Equinox Gold 2026 guidance , 14 January 2026 — issued before the Orla combination closed on 31 July 2026 and not since restated, so the row is the pre-Orla portfolio; Aris Mining per Table 1. Figures are each company’s own reporting basis and cover quality metrics only — the Section 7 valuation is standalone and carries no peer multiples. Screen the live peer set on Metal Pilot.

Aris is the smallest of the three by production and the only one whose reserve grade — 10.70 g/t at Segovia — reflects narrow-vein underground mining rather than bulk open-pit or heap-leach economics. On cost the comparison needs care: Aris’s combined H1 2026 AISC of $1,974/oz is above all three peers (Lundin Gold $1,110–1,170/oz, Torex $1,750–1,850/oz AuEq, Equinox $1,775–1,875/oz), but a third of its ounces are bought-in contract-mining feed priced off gold — a margin business rather than a cost base — and owner-mining AISC of $1,623/oz is competitive. The differentiator is the fully-owned, technically-studied pipeline: no peer carries US$4.5 billion of study NPV against a US$4.1 billion market capitalisation.

3. Financials & balance sheet

FY2025 was a record year: total revenue of US$927.7 million (gold revenue US$909 million, +82%), income from mining operations of US$432.8 million (a 46.7% margin against 28.8% in FY2024) and adjusted EBITDA of US$464.4 million. Statutory net income to owners was US$78.3 million (US$0.42 basic) — below the operating result because a US$76.8 million loss on financial instruments, a US$39.2 million FX loss and US$42.1 million of share-based compensation sit between them. H1 2026 revenue was US$702.7 million, adjusted EBITDA US$390.7 million and net income US$191.9 million (US$0.93 basic), trailing adjusted EBITDA US$690 million.

Table 4. Four-year financial summary (US$m unless stated)

Notes to Table 4

1. FY2021 is omitted, not blank by oversight: the Company was GCM Mining Corp. until the September 2022 merger with Aris Gold, and no filing restates the predecessor entities on the current consolidated basis. FY2022 itself carries Aris Gold only from 26 September 2022.
2. Free cash flow is operating cash flow less additions to mining interests, plant and equipment and less capitalised interest paid — the Company capitalises a large part of its interest into development projects, so excluding it would flatter the figure.
3. Sustaining capital is a non-IFRS measure the Company discloses from FY2025; the ~US$48 m figure is the group total implied by the FY2025 disclosure, of which Segovia was US$45.0 m. Earlier years are n/d.
4. Net debt is the Company’s own definition — Senior Notes principal plus Gold Notes par less cash — first published on this basis for FY2024. It excludes lease liabilities (US$6.8 m at 30 June 2026).
5. Dividends and buybacks were paid in FY2022 and have not recurred: US$10.4 m of dividends and US$3.1 m of share repurchases in the merger year, nothing since.

Source: Aris Mining’s audited consolidated statements of income, equity and cash flows, filed on Form 40-F: FY2025 (covering FY2025 and FY2024), FY2024 (FY2024 and FY2023) and FY2023 (FY2023 and FY2022). Adjusted EBITDA, sustaining capital and net debt are the Company’s own non-IFRS measures, reconciled in the MD&A of the year in which they appear.

Reading the three statements together. Applying the Financial Metrics for Commodity Investing framework: the income statement shows a real margin — 46.7% income from mining on a 52% higher realised price. The cash flow statement shows FY2025 operating cash flow of US$373.0 million comfortably above net income of US$79.4 million and growing faster; but free cash flow was negative in FY2022–FY2024 and only turned positive in FY2025, because the Company spends its operating cash flow on growth. The balance sheet’s striking figure is dilution: the weighted-average diluted count rose 64% to 191.3 million shares since FY2022, almost all of it the merger, the Aris Gold acquisition and a US$126.1 million option and warrant exercise. The cash backs the profit.

Balance sheet and liquidity. Aris ended H1 2026 with cash of US$425.6 million against total debt of US$469.6 million at par — net debt of US$44.0 million, or 0.06× trailing adjusted EBITDA; at a US$3,000/oz deck EBITDA would still be about US$381 million and the ratio 0.12×. Working capital was a US$267.7 million surplus. Debt is the US$450 million 8.00% Senior Unsecured Notes due October 2029 (carrying US$444.2 million, matching its market value) plus US$19.6 million par of amortising Gold Notes maturing August 2027; the maturity ladder is benign and no committed undrawn facility is disclosed. Rehabilitation provisions are US$15.2 million discounted (US$61.1 million undiscounted), scheduled 2026–2054 at a 12.0% pre-tax Colombian risk-free rate.

Hedge / treasury book. Aris runs a fully unhedged gold-price policy — the financial-risk note discloses no forward sales, swaps or collars — but is not price-neutral in its liabilities. The Gold Notes pay a quarterly premium equal to the amount by which the LBMA gold price exceeds a US$1,400/oz floor, so they behave as a small short gold position: on US$19.6 million of par, carrying value at 30 June 2026 was US$54.8 million, a US$35.2 million mark that rises with gold and is bridged as such in Section 7. Aris paid US$20.4 million of Gold Notes interest and premiums in H1 2026; the notes amortise to August 2027, so the exposure self-liquidates. There is no FX hedging, and the peso’s 13% appreciation is the largest cost pressure the MD&A identifies.

The cost deck handed to Section 7. Guided unit cost: Segovia owner-mining cash cost US$1,150–1,250/oz and AISC US$1,700–1,800/oz, struck on US$4,400/oz gold and 3,800 COP/USD; Marmato is unguided until commercial production. Grade: Segovia’s 10.70 g/t reserve grade sits below the 11.24 g/t processed in H1 2026, so realised grade steps down, while Marmato’s steps up at eight times the throughput. Price-linked cost lines: royalties 3.57% and social contributions 3.43% of Segovia gold revenue; CMP purchases at 62.5% of the realised price; Marmato’s 8.87% royalty. Cost inflation is peso-driven. Tax-pool horizon: none to run out — the US$359.3 million of unrecognised deductible differences is material the Company does not expect to use, and its Colombian entities pay cash tax now.

Capital returns. Aris pays no dividend and has no buyback programme, having paid US$10.4 million of dividends and repurchased US$3.1 million of stock in FY2022 and neither since. The priority through 2026–2027 is self-funding both expansions and the two studies from operating cash flow (Section 9, Dimension 6).

4. Management, strategy & corporate structure

4.1 Management & governance

Aris Mining is led by Neil Woodyer, Chief Executive Officer since the September 2022 merger and, since 21 January 2026, also Chair of the Board, succeeding Ian Telfer. His record is the most relevant credential in the sector: CEO of Endeavour Mining 2002–2016, CEO of Leagold Mining 2016 until its 2020 merger with Equinox Gold, then CEO of Aris Gold through the 2022 merger with GCM Mining. Douglas Bowlby, promoted to President in the same January 2026 changes, was Executive Vice President of Aris Mining and, before that, SVP Corporate Development of Leagold. Cameron Paterson has been Chief Financial Officer since 7 July 2025, joining from Pan American Silver where he was SVP Finance and Information Technology. Ashley Baker became Chief Legal Officer in January 2026 after four years as General Counsel, and Oliver Dachsel, SVP Capital Markets since April 2024, was a Managing Director at Jefferies covering mining.

The governance offset to a combined Chair/CEO is explicit: David Garofalo — President and CEO of Goldcorp Inc. 2016–2019, now Chair and CEO of Gold Royalty Corp. — was appointed Lead Independent Director on 21 January 2026 and chairs both the Audit and Compensation committees. The board has eight directors and four standing committees. Three bring direct Colombian public-sector experience: Mónica de Greiff, Chair of Ecopetrol S.A. and former Vice Minister of Mines and Energy, chairs Sustainability; Gonzalo Hernández, an Ecopetrol director and former Technical Vice Minister of Finance, chairs Corporate Governance & Nominating; and Germán Arce Zapata, formerly of Colombia’s National Mining Agency, sits on Audit and Sustainability. Brigitte Baptiste, Rector of Universidad Ean and former Director of the Alexander von Humboldt Institute — Colombia’s national biodiversity research centre — joined on 29 October 2025 and sits on Sustainability, an appointment that reads directly against the Santurbán question. Attie Roux, former COO of Equinox Gold, Leagold and Endeavour Mining, serves as a director and paid technical consultant — a related-party arrangement, disclosed as such. Daniela Cambone completes the board.

4.2 Strategy & capital allocation

The stated strategy blends current production with transformational growth, executed through organic expansion rather than third-party M&A — the one material recent acquisition, Soto Norte’s remaining 49%, consolidated an asset Aris already operated. Forward targets are dated: 2026 production of 300,000–350,000 oz; a medium-term ~500,000 oz/yr once both expansions ramp; and a longer-term ~1 million oz/yr including both projects, contingent on permits neither holds. Growth capital has come from operating cash flow plus the non-dilutive Wheaton stream, not equity — the only shares issued were 1,739,130 to Mubadala as deal consideration and 4.97 million from option and warrant exercises. A base shelf prospectus was filed on 30 July 2026; nothing has been drawn, but it is the standing option on dilution.

4.3 Ownership & corporate structure

Table 5. Ownership and corporate structure

Source: Aris Mining interim financial statements, 30 June 2026 — notes 7, 10, 12 and 13; Aris Mining 2025 Annual Information Form , 11 March 2026, for the stream terms and the ICSID settlement; Aris Mining Updates Early Warning Report in Respect of Seasif Exploration , 4 August 2026.

The ICSID settlement is more than a legal footnote: it is the first agreement of its kind in Colombia to resolve an investor-state arbitration, structured around performance obligations rather than a cash award — Aris dropped the legacy claim for ten-year cooperation commitments from the National Police, the Ministry of Defence and the Caldas environmental authority around Marmato formalisation. That is a genuine de-risking of the security and informal-mining relationship — and it resolves nothing about Soto Norte’s environmental licence.

5. ESG & sustainability

Aris Mining’s most distinctive ESG feature is its Contract Mining Partner programme, which formalises small-scale miners working near its titles rather than treating them as a security problem. At Segovia, roughly 2,500 CMP miners supplied 33% of the mill feed in H1 2026, and the Soto Norte design dedicates 750 tpd of its planned 3,500 tpd to the same model. The November 2025 settlement with the Government of Colombia folds that work into a 10-year, government-overseen framework (Section 4.3). Aris paid US$27.1 million of social contributions in 2025 and US$21.0 million in H1 2026, running at roughly 3.4% of Segovia’s gold revenue inside AISC.

Environmental liabilities are disclosed and modest in accounting terms: reclamation and rehabilitation provisions of US$15.2 million discounted, US$61.1 million undiscounted (Marmato US$35.6 m, Segovia US$17.2 m, Soto Norte US$8.3 m), with closure spending scheduled 2026–2054. Segovia’s environmental authority has separately assessed COP 35.6 billion (US$10.3 million) of effluent-discharge fees, disputed, against a US$6.1 million provision. The Soto Norte design answers the páramo objection directly — cyanide- and mercury-free processing, underground grouting against groundwater drawdown, protection of the La Baja Creek — and the October 2025 appointment of Brigitte Baptiste to the board and its Sustainability Committee is a substantive signal. Against all that, the Santurbán licensing question remains unresolved and material. No group safety or emissions-intensity trend with enough dated granularity to chart was located; that gap is noted rather than papered over (Section 10.1).

6. Risks

Table 6. Risk register

Source: Aris Mining 2025 Annual Information Form §5 Risk Factors and §6 property descriptions; Q2 2026 MD&A for the peso, commissioning and licensing status; Colombia’s sovereign rating per S&P Global Ratings, April 2026. Net-asset-value shares are from the Section 7 model. Likelihood and impact are the author’s assessment.

The through-line is that Aris’s near-term financial position is genuinely strong — but almost every named risk sits either in gold-price exposure the Company has chosen not to hedge, or in the single jurisdiction that hosts 100% of current production and 93% of enterprise net asset value.

Two of these would break the thesis rather than dent it. Gold reverting toward its five-year average is the first: at a US$3,000/oz deck the blended fair value in Section 7 falls to US$16.08, below the current price, and Marmato’s guidance-year contribution turns negative — the balance sheet survives it comfortably, the valuation does not. A refusal, or a multi-year stall, at Santurbán is the second: it would remove US$1.66 billion of risked net asset value outright and, more damagingly, re-price the Company’s stated path to a million ounces a year. The remaining risks are execution and cost risks that a strong balance sheet and a 58% AISC margin can absorb; these two are not.

Figure 4. Risk matrix — likelihood against impact

Figure data: Table 6. Each point prints its likelihood × impact score; the shaded region is the high-likelihood, high-impact quadrant (likelihood ≥ 3.5 and impact ≥ 3.5). Ratings are the author’s assessment, not disclosed figures.

7. Valuation

Valuation as of 7 September 2026, in US dollars. Horizon: spot fair value. Price deck: base gold US$4,000/oz — the 3-month trailing average (US$4,236, June–August 2026) snapped down to the fixed US$3,000–5,000 grid — with every grid price run as a scenario; the LBMA analyst-survey deck as a 0%-weight cross-check; no spot deck. Discount rate 5% real, after-tax — the precious-metals convention and the rate Aris’s own studies report — sensitised 4–7%. Colombia risk is charged once, in the target P/NAV. Share price US$20.05 (4 September close), 209.5 m fully diluted shares, balance sheet as of 30 June 2026.

Aris is valued on the producer (mining) archetype, run as a sum-of-the-parts because the equity is four claims: two producing mines, two studied but unpermitted projects, and a resource base larger than the reserves being mined. The method is the How to Value Commodity Stocks guide’s. The headline is a deck-to-value map: the blend is US$31.43/share at the US$4,000/oz base price, US$23.10 at US$3,500 and US$39.33 at US$4,500, and each US$500/oz step is worth about US$7.62 of net asset value per share (Table 12). The producing mines plus the whole bridge are US$23.72/share, the risked projects US$11.00, the resource US$6.46.

7.1 Method selection

The blend is the producer default — NAV/DCF 50% / EV/EBITDA 30% / a cash-flow-yield read 20% — carried without deviation. The third slice is FCF-yield support built from disclosed lines: the guidance table’s sustaining capital and the cash-flow statement’s tax basis, which also feed the guidance-year bridge in §7.4. The intrinsic method is one method at 50%; the two cash-flow reads together sit exactly at the 50% collinear ceiling, stated in the table.

Table 7. Valuation method selection

Source: method-to-archetype mapping and the default weight set per The Commodity Investor, Part 11: How to Value Commodity Stocks , “The archetype is the unit of analysis” and “The valuation toolkit”; the producer default carried without deviation. Archetype per Section 1. Input families: intrinsic 50% (a single method), cash-flow 50% (two methods, at the collinear ceiling), asset & capacity 0%, transaction 0% — inside the family caps. Target multiples are derived in §7.3 from the archetype anchors, not from a peer set.

7.2 Net asset value

Vehicle map. Every asset is held directly by Aris Mining Corporation through wholly-owned subsidiaries, so nothing inside one line reappears in another.

Table 8. Vehicle map

Source: Aris Mining interim financial statements, 30 June 2026 , notes 5, 7, 12 and 13c; stream terms and the ownership register per the 2025 Annual Information Form , AIF §5 “Precious Metals Streams” and AIF §6.4 “Royalties”.

Tax basis and the shield. Segovia and Marmato run at Colombia’s 35% statutory rate on the cash margin with no depreciation shield — the rate the Soto Norte study uses. The FY2025 income-tax note discloses US$359.3 million of deductible differences and unused losses for which no deferred tax asset is recognised, chiefly holding-company losses the Colombian entities cannot use; they are declined, and any usable pool would raise net asset value, bounded at US$0.60/share. The projects enter at their own studies’ tax schedules; Marmato’s assesses tax and royalties on market-price revenue rather than streamed revenue.

Rehabilitation. The reclamation line is bridged from the statements at US$15.2 million (US$0.7 m current plus US$14.5 m non-current at 30 June 2026), not from AISC, which carries only the US$0.6 million half-year accretion. It is the Company’s discounted best estimate at a 12.0% pre-tax Colombian risk-free rate against a US$61.1 million undiscounted total; at this model’s 5% real rate the liability would be larger, so net asset value is overstated by the difference, bounded at US$0.22/share.

Stage risk is charged once, in the row. Both projects are tranches inside a producer’s sum-of-the-parts, so stage risk sits in the row risk weight, set from an itemised milestone status. Soto Norte — prefeasibility complete, title held, environmental licence not applied for, no financing, no construction decision, adverse district precedent — reads the 0.35–0.55× band and takes the floor, 0.35×. Toroparu — preliminary assessment only, no reserves, mining licence not issued, a contingent stream, no decision before 2027 — reads the 0.20–0.40× band and takes the floor, 0.20×. The target P/NAV and the discount rate carry no second charge. Funding: the only committed capital is Marmato’s US$118 million less the US$42 million Wheaton instalment — 1.8% of market capitalisation against US$425.6 million of cash, so no financing enters the model.

The per-asset NPV build. Segovia and Marmato are author-built floor DCFs off booked reserves; the two projects are carried at their own disclosed after-tax NPV5%, interpolated to the deck on each study’s printed sensitivity and risked. One rate treatment covers every asset — the model and both studies run at 5% real, and both studies publish NPV at 0%, 5% and 10%, so Figure 6’s rate rows move every row.

Table 9. Per-asset NPV build — base case (US$4,000/oz gold, 5% real)

Notes to Table 9

1. Segovia’s reserve statement covers Aris’s own mining panels; contract-mining feed is purchased material sourced from within and outside the Company’s titles, so the reserve is consumed by owner mining and the contract-mining margin is carried alongside it for the same period.
2. The guidance figure is struck on a US$4,400/oz gold price, of which 7.0% (royalties 3.57% plus social contributions 3.43% of gold revenue, per the H1 2026 cost table) is price-linked; the fixed remainder is US$1,442/oz and the price-linked part re-prices with the deck in every column.
3. Contract-mining margin is a percentage of the realised price by construction, so this leg is fully deck-linked and carries no sustaining capital.
4. FY2025 general and administrative costs were US$21.3 m and H1 2026 US$13.7 m; US$27.0 m/yr is the annualised current run rate. Charged here, so the bridge’s G&A line prints in rows.
5. Reserve life is 1,503 koz ÷ 189.0 koz/yr = 7.9527 years, and the annuity factor is struck on that unrounded figure. If part of the contract-mining feed is sourced inside Aris’s own reserve, the owner-mining life shortens; the bound is the reserve consumed by total mill output (5.32 years), which takes net asset value per share to US$37.21, US$3.97 lower.
6. The 2022 study’s own life-of-mine gold revenue of US$4,385.7 m on 2,985.6 koz at US$1,600/oz implies 0.918; the H1 2026 realised-price ratio of 0.920 is the more current figure and is the one used.
7. The study’s royalty line is US$423.8 m on 2,985.6 koz at US$1,600/oz — 8.87% of market-price gold revenue, above Segovia’s rate because the Marmato titles carry a different royalty structure.
8. The study states that “Colombian corporate tax and royalties are assessed on the basis that all gold and silver is sold at market prices”, so the stream reduces the revenue line but not the tax or royalty base.
9. Marmato produced roughly 95 koz between 2023 and June 2026 against the 2,985.6 koz the plan recovers. The steady-state rate of 200 koz/yr is the Company’s own stated run rate; the resulting life runs to about 2041, consistent with the 2040 life-of-mine the Wheaton contract note assumes.
10. Discounted at 5% real from the valuation date: 21 koz at 0.25 yr, 110 koz at 1 yr, 200 koz at 2 yr, then 200 koz/yr for 12.80 years discounted from year 2 at an annuity factor of 9.2885.
11. Not credited: the US$42 m final Wheaton instalment due in Q3 2026. It is stream consideration and the stream is already charged in the row’s price line, so crediting it would count the same money twice.
12. Milestone status: prefeasibility complete (September 2025) ✓; mining title held ✓; environmental licence not applied for; no project financing; no construction decision; adverse district precedent (the Angostura ban). Every milestone above the study itself is outstanding, which is why the factor sits at the band floor rather than mid-band.
13. The assessment already charges the Wheaton Toroparu stream inside its own cash flow — US$1,356 m of life-of-mine stream losses against a US$138 m construction credit — so no further encumbrance is applied here.
14. Milestone status: preliminary economic assessment only (October 2025), including inferred material ✓; no reserve booked; mining licence not yet issued; prefeasibility in progress; the US$138 m Wheaton tranche contingent on the counterparty’s election; construction decision no earlier than early 2027.
15. Measured and indicated resources are reported inclusive of reserves at both mines, so the exclusive figure is the difference. Soto Norte’s and Toroparu’s own resources are not converted here — they are already monetised, risked, inside their study NPVs.
16. The band floor, because 4.94 Moz is 106% of reserves — far above the level at which the row becomes mandatory — but roughly three-fifths of it is Marmato’s lower-grade Lower Mine material at 2.54 g/t on a reserve estimate that has not been restated since 2022.
17. ≈ US$274 per measured and indicated ounce, against US$1,095 per reserve ounce inside the plans. All inferred material (Segovia 2.86 Moz, Marmato 2.79 Moz, Soto Norte 3.90 Moz, Toroparu 1.18 Moz) is carried at 0.0, as optionality (§7.5).

Source: this analysis, from the Aris Mining 2025 Annual Information Form , AIF §6.1–§6.4, the Q2 2026 MD&A and the 2026 production and cost guidance release of 21 January 2026. The value column is headed Value rather than US$m because a build that multiplies heterogeneous terms cannot hold one unit — the unit sits in the line item, and only the = rows are the asset’s own currency.

Calibration. Re-run on H1 2026 volumes at the realised US$4,701/oz, the Segovia build returns US$358.3 m against the US$382.2 m reported — 6.2% low, because the guidance cost this model uses is above what Segovia delivered — and the Marmato cash cost re-runs to US$22.2 m against a reported US$22.2 m. Re-struck at the study’s own US$1,600/oz deck over the full 2,985.6 koz plan, the Marmato row returns US$776.3 m against the study’s US$839.4 m, 7.5% low. All three sit inside the 10% tolerance and err conservatively.

Table 10. Per-asset model — base case (US$4,000/oz gold, 5% real)

Source: this analysis. Every NPV in the last column reproduces from its block in Table 9; this table adds the reserve, cost, capital, tax and discounting inputs behind those figures. Marmato’s cash-flow column shows the first modelled year and the steady-state year. Both study rows carry their own after-tax NPV rather than an author-built cash flow, so their annual cash-flow cells print —.

Table 11. NAV build-up and equity bridge (base case — US$4,000/oz, 5% real)

Source: this analysis (Table 10); net debt, leases, provisions, deferred revenue, investments and the option schedule per the Aris Mining interim financial statements, 30 June 2026 , notes 7, 10, 11, 12 and 13. Bridge lines are printed in order, each even where empty; the lines are printed to one decimal and the totals are the unrounded sums, so the printed bridge lines foot to US$8,626.4 against an unrounded equity NAV of US$8,626.3. The tiers sum to the published NAV per share: 23.72 + 11.00 + 6.46 = US$41.18 — and the producing tier alone is US$23.72, 18% above the US$20.05 price, so on this model the market is paying less than the two operating mines are worth and taking the pipeline and the resource for nothing. No post-period event is bridged: the only transaction between the balance-sheet date and the valuation date was the 4 August 2026 sale of a Seasif Exploration stake for C$77,500, which is immaterial. Values are computed on unrounded inputs and printed to one decimal (US$m) and two decimals (per share).

Figure 5. NAV build-up and equity bridge

Figure data: Table 11. “Bridge” groups the six net bridge lines: net debt US$44.0 m, the gold-linked mark US$32.3 m, the reclamation provision US$15.2 m and net working capital and other provisions US$99.5 m, less investments of US$37.0 m. Equity net asset value of US$8,626.3 m equates to US$41.18 per fully diluted share; the producing tier alone is US$23.72.

Figure 6. NAV/share sensitivity — gold price × discount rate

Notes to Figure 6

1. Checksum — the US$3,500 column at the base rate, re-run through the build blocks: Segovia US$1,832.7 m + Marmato US$2,340.4 m + Soto Norte US$1,399.7 m + Toroparu US$504.3 m + resource US$1,101.4 m = US$7,178.6 m enterprise; less net debt US$44.0 m, the gold-linked mark US$26.1 m and reclamation US$15.2 m, plus net working capital of −US$99.5 m and investments of US$37.0 m = US$7,030.7 m ÷ 209.50 m = US$33.56.
2. Rate rows — every row re-discounts. Segovia, Marmato and the resource row move on the model’s own schedules; Soto Norte and Toroparu move on their studies’ printed after-tax NPV-by-rate profiles (US$4,985 m / US$2,680 m / US$1,519 m and US$3,927 m / US$1,805 m / US$865 m at 0%, 5% and 10%), interpolated log-linearly — factors of ×1.132 and ×1.168 at 4%, and ×0.797 and ×0.745 at 7%. Nothing is held flat along the rate axis.
3. Cost — a 10% increase in every unit cost at the base price takes NAV/share to US$39.82 (−3.3%); a 10% higher deck (US$4,400/oz) gives US$47.27 (+14.8%), and that is already the lagged figure, because the price-linked cost lines — Segovia’s royalties and social contributions at 7.0% of gold revenue, the contract-mining purchase price at 62.5% of the realised price, and Marmato’s 8.87% royalty — all escalate with the deck inside the rows. The margin is fat enough at US$4,000/oz gold that cost inflation is a second-order risk beside the price.
4. FX — n/a. Aris reports in US dollars, the model is struck in US dollars, and the valuation prices off the US-dollar NYSE line. The Toronto line trades in Canadian dollars; a C$ holder should convert at the prevailing rate. The Colombian peso is an operating-cost exposure, not a translation one, and is carried in note 3 and in Section 6.
5. Stage risk — the risked tranche is 26.2% of enterprise net asset value, above the level at which this test is mandatory. One band lower on each project (Soto Norte 0.20×, Toroparu 0.10× — the second a stated departure below the lowest band the convention carries) gives US$36.24, US$4.93 lower.
6. Schedule slip — Soto Norte’s first production and remaining capital one year later, with its risk weight held, gives US$40.80, US$0.38 lower. The milestone whose slip would do it is the environmental licence application, whose submission has already moved past its Q2 2026 target.

Figure data: this analysis’ model (Tables 9–11), every cell recomputed from the rows at that column’s gold price and that row’s discount rate, never scaled from the base cell. Price columns are the fixed gold grid, grid version 2026-09 (US$3,000–5,000/oz); base case US$4,000/oz at 5% real. A one-step (US$500/oz) gold move shifts NAV/share by roughly ±US$7.6, or ±18.5%; the deck sensitivity is tabulated in Table 12.

Deck sensitivity. The grid holds the recomputed values; this table names the slope between grid prices.

Table 12. Deck sensitivity — value per US$500/oz step of gold (US$/share unless stated; base rate, target multiples held)

Source: this analysis, Tables 9–11 and 19. % of base is each line’s per-step move divided by its own base-price value — a leverage read. Linear over is the gold range on which the slope holds: ¹ guidance-year free cash flow after all capital crosses zero at about US$3,447/oz; ² the scenario blend steps unevenly because the discount rate and the two risk weights move with the column. Every step is the difference between two recomputed grid prices of Figure 6, never a fitted slope. How to use it: start from the base-price values (NAV/share US$41.18, blended fair value US$31.43) and add or subtract the per-step figure for every US$500/oz away from US$4,000 — a US$4,200/oz flat deck gives a NAV/share of about US$44.2 and a held-multiple blend of about US$33.8; for a reading that also moves the rate and the risk weights, use the scenario columns of Table 19.

P/NAV ladder. The net asset value as a price map, off Figure 6’s base-rate row — the share price each of the archetype’s five fixed P/NAV levels implies at every grid price. Unweighted.

Table 13. P/NAV ladder — share price implied by each P/NAV level at each grid price (US$/share)

Source: this analysis, solved on Tables 9–11: each cell is the Figure 6 base-rate NAV/share at that column’s gold price (25.94 / 33.56 / 41.18 / 48.79 / 56.41) × the row’s P/NAV level. The five levels are the fixed set every producer analysis in this series uses, so two producers read column-for-column; Aris’s 0.98× target, derived in §7.3, reads US$40.35 at the base price, between the 0.75× and 1.00× levels. Unweighted: the table translates a multiple and a deck into a share price without today’s quote — parity at the base price is US$41.18, and where the current price sits on this map is said by the market-implied deck in §7.5.

7.3 Relative valuation

At US$20.05 and 206.4 million basic shares, market capitalisation is US$4,138.9 m and enterprise value US$4,183.0 m. Each target is the fixed producer anchor moved by the drivers Section 9 has scored; no peer multiples appear, which is a sector comparison ’s job. Forward metrics are struck on FY2026 guidance at the base deck. Because the base sits 51% above gold’s five-year average of US$2,643/oz (Sep 2021–Aug 2026, daily closes), the cycle is normalised on the deck side: every anchor holds at mid-cycle and only the deck flexes.

Table 14. Target-multiple driver line (one line, applied to every multiple)

Source: this analysis; each term is tied to one scored dimension, capped at ±10%, and no fact is charged under two labels — country risk sits under jurisdiction and the number of producing assets under asset quality, and the two are different facts. Dimensions 4, 7 and 9 score at or near the archetype norm on the drivers this line uses and carry no term. The line is printed once and reused for every multiple, so one scorecard moves every read the same way:

Target P/NAV = 1.00× anchor × (1 − 0.02) = 0.980× → 0.98× · Target EV/EBITDA = 7.0× anchor × 0.98 = 6.86× → 6.9× · Target FCF yield = 7.0% anchor ÷ 0.98 = 7.14% → 7.1% (a discount to value is a higher yield demanded). Rounded figures are the ones used in every table below.

Table 15. Forward EBITDA build — FY2026 guidance year at the base deck

Source: this analysis; volumes per the 2026 production and cost guidance of 21 January 2026 (Segovia 265–300 koz, Marmato 35–50 koz, midpoints taken, with the 66.9%/33.1% owner-to-contract-mining split from H1 2026 ounces sold); unit costs per the same release and the Q2 2026 MD&A cost tables. “Forward” is the guidance year, FY2026; the volume ties to guidance with nothing added above it. Cost basis: AISC less sustaining capital for the EBITDA line, AISC in full for the net-asset-value rows — the two are reconciled by the memo line, so the gap between the multiple’s and the model’s margins is a definition, not an error. Marmato’s US$2,980/oz cash cost is calibrated to H1 2026 and reproduces it to 0.1% (the calibration paragraph above Table 10).

Table 16. Relative valuation — implied value per share (base case)

Source: this analysis; anchors per the valuation guide linked in §7.1, “The valuation toolkit” (producer: P/NAV parity, EV/EBITDA 7.0×, FCF yield 7.0%). The implied enterprise value crosses every bridge line the net asset value crosses (Table 11), so the two methods differ only in what they see, not in how they reach equity. Values computed on unrounded inputs. To run the same net asset value and multiples across every listed gold producer, screen the sector on Metal Pilot.

The two reads land US$20.31 apart, and the spread is the finding. A 6.9× multiple on the FY2026 guidance year prices Segovia at its run rate and a fifth of Marmato; it cannot see Marmato’s ramp from 42 koz to 200 koz, the two studied projects, or 4.9 Moz of measured and indicated ounces outside both plans — the last two alone are US$17.46/share. At US$20.05 the market pays 6.6× the guidance year and nothing for growth already funded.

7.4 FCF-yield support

The third weighted read capitalises forward free cash flow before growth capital at the archetype’s yield anchor moved by the same driver line. Every input is a disclosed line.

Table 17. FCF-yield support build — FY2026 at the base deck

Source: this analysis; sustaining and growth capital per the Q2 2026 MD&A (“Sustaining capital” and “Growth and expansion capital” in the key-performance-indicator table, and the US$118 m Marmato figure in Project Development Highlights); depreciation and taxes paid per the FY2025 consolidated statement of cash flows . Growth capital is excluded from the weighted method by construction — the method reads the producing business’s cash generation, and the value of what the growth capital buys is what the net asset value leg carries — and included in the memo, so both readings are on the page.

The method lands at US$26.21, between the other two. Its weakness is standard: a yield capitalisation is a perpetuity struck on one guided year, and FY2026 is a year in which Marmato contributes 42 koz on its way to 200 koz — understating the run rate and overstating the durability of Segovia’s eight-year reserve life at once. Hence the 20% cap.

7.5 Cross-checks

Every line below is reported, reconciled to the blend, and unweighted.

Table 18. Cross-checks — reported, reconciled, never weighted

Source: this analysis; the market-implied and flip prices solved on the Tables 9–17 model. The own-multiple history is from stockanalysis.com annual ratios (data from S&P Global Market Intelligence), read 4 September 2026. The Soto Norte transaction terms are from the interim financial statements , note 13c. Gold’s 12-month range and five-year average are daily closes to 31 August 2026, source in the assumptions box. Consensus per stockanalysis.com , 4 September 2026.

7.6 Scenarios & fair value

Every weighted method is re-run in every column of the gold grid. The deck moves one step at a time; the discount rate steps out from the 5% base on the downside (7%, 9%) and holds at the precious-metals convention on the upside, because a real rate below the industry’s own floor would price these mines as safer than the industry treats them at any price; the projects’ risk weights move along their bands, holding at the floor in the downside columns because milestone status, not the gold price, sets it. The three targets are held at their mid-cycle anchors in every column.

Table 19. Scenarios & fair value — inputs, value per method and the blend by grid price (US$/share)

Source: this analysis; weights per §7.1 (the producer default, no deviation); scenario names by offset from the base price. Base blend on a calculator: 0.50 × 40.35 + 0.30 × 20.04 + 0.20 × 26.21 = 20.18 + 6.01 + 5.24 = US$31.43 (on unrounded values). Inputs behind the rows, by column: Soto Norte risk weight 0.35× / 0.35× / 0.35× / 0.40× / 0.45× and Toroparu 0.20× / 0.20× / 0.20× / 0.25× / 0.30×, each inside its band, holding at the floor in the two downside columns because the milestone status does not improve when gold falls; resource conversion factor 0.25× / 0.25× / 0.25× / 0.30× / 0.35×; forward EBITDA US$380.7 m / US$505.7 m / US$630.7 m / US$755.6 m / US$880.6 m; the gold-linked mark on the Gold Notes re-marked at US$19.9 m / US$26.1 m / US$32.3 m / US$38.5 m / US$44.8 m — it rises against the Company as gold rises, and the commodity-hedge book itself is empty in every column. The second memo row holds the base rate and base risk weights, so it is the linear version reproducible from Table 12. Aris pays no dividend, so there is no total-return line to add. Illustrative scenarios, not forecasts.

Figure 7. Value per share by method and scenario

Source: this analysis; each cell recomputed at its column’s deck, rate and risk weights (Table 19); data-level ranked 0–9 across the whole grid. The net asset value leg carries by far the steepest leverage — it is the only method that owns the pipeline and the resource — which is why it anchors the blend and why the two cash-flow reads are capped together at 50%. Current share price US$20.05 (4 September 2026); market-implied deck ~US$3,060/oz. The bracketed figure under each value is its change against the same row’s base-case value.

Conclusion. The blended base-case fair value is US$31.43, inside a US$16.08 (Deep Bear, US$3,000/oz) – US$47.81 (Deep Bull, US$5,000/oz) range, against a US$20.05 price — an implied +56.8%, which reads Undervalued. The qualifier is not earned: the deep-bear blend sits 20% below the price, inside the threshold at which a “(wide band)” flag would apply, because the two cash-flow methods hold up in a US$3,000/oz world where the net asset value does not. At the base price guidance-year free cash flow is US$89.9 m after all capital — a 2.2% yield, 9.4% before growth capital. Rating-flip price: the blend falls into Modestly undervalued below about US$3,557/oz (−11%); Undervalued is the top band, so there is no flip up.

The methods disagree widely — §7.3 sizes the gap — and the spread is explained rather than averaged: the multiple sees one guided year at Segovia, the yield read capitalises that year forever, and the net asset value is the only one that counts Marmato’s ramp, two studied projects and 4.9 Moz of measured and indicated ounces beyond both plans, once each and risked at every band floor. The tiers are the framing: the producing mines plus the whole bridge are worth US$23.72/share, the market pays US$20.05, and a buyer receives the pipeline, the resource and the gold-price optionality for nothing. Against that sits §7.5’s most uncomfortable number — the only observable transaction on Soto Norte valued it at a tenth of the risked figure here, with the Street’s US$37.00 target between the two.

Assumptions box: valuation date 7 September 2026; market date 4 September 2026 (close); balance-sheet as-of 30 June 2026 (net debt US$44.0 m, lease liabilities US$6.8 m outside it); no post-period event bridged beyond an immaterial listed-stake disposal; horizon spot fair value. Trading currency US dollars — Aris reports in US dollars and the analysis prices off the NYSE line, so no FX conversion enters the model and the FX sensitivity is n/a; the Toronto line trades in Canadian dollars, converted at C$1.4204/US$ where a C$ figure appears (30 June 2026, per the interim statements’ share-unit note). Price decks: base gold US$4,000/oz — the 3-month trailing average of US$4,236 snapped down to the fixed grid; the 6-month (US$4,480) and 12-month (US$4,388) averages both sit inside the January–February all-time-high spike and are set aside for that reason — run across the US$3,000–5,000/oz grid, grid version 2026-09; the LBMA July 2026 analyst-survey deck (US$4,500 at year-end 2026, US$4,604 full-year average) carried as a 0%-weight cross-check; no spot deck. Gold price series: daily GC=F closes to 31 August 2026 via goldpricetracker.com (Yahoo Finance) — 3-month US$4,236.11, 6-month US$4,479.53, 12-month US$4,388.36, five-year US$2,642.88 on 1,256 closes. Decks and rates are real and after-tax; discount rate 5% real post-tax throughout, sensitised 4–7%, with no jurisdiction premium in the rate because Colombia is charged once in the target P/NAV. Share basis 209.50 m fully diluted (treasury-stock method on the 30 June 2026 option schedule at the C$27.74 close); basic 206.43 m and diluted differ by 1.5%, so one count is published. Values per share printed to two decimals, multiples to two significant figures, computed on unrounded inputs and rounded half-up. Cycle normalised on the deck side (the base deck is 51% above gold’s five-year average), so every anchor is held at mid-cycle in every scenario; anchors are the producer conventions — P/NAV parity, EV/EBITDA 7.0×, FCF yield 7.0% — moved by one driver line (Table 14, ×0.98); no anchor re-sourced. Metric basis forward FY2026 (the guidance year), EBITDA before sustaining capital, net debt on the Company’s own definition excluding leases; P/NAV form equity (market capitalisation ÷ equity net asset value). No peer multiples enter this section. Method weights NAV/DCF 50% / EV/EBITDA 30% / FCF-yield support 20% — the producer default, no deviation. NAV provenance: author-built life-of-mine DCFs on Segovia and Marmato; company-published after-tax study NPV5% interpolated on each study’s own printed price sensitivity and risked on Soto Norte and Toroparu; a conversion of exclusive measured and indicated resources at the band floor. Tax basis: Colombia’s 35% statutory rate on the cash margin with no depreciation shield on the two producing rows (pools declined, +US$0.60/share bound), each study’s own schedule on the two project rows; rehabilitation provision bridged from the 30 June 2026 provisions note at US$15.2 m carrying value. Primary value yardstick: P/NAV (equity form). Stage-risk placement: the two project rows’ risk weights — Soto Norte 0.35× and Toroparu 0.20×, both the floor of their bands, argued from an itemised milestone status in §7.2 — with the target P/NAV and the discount rate carrying no second charge; the producing rows and the resource row carry 1.00× and 0.25× respectively. Encumbrances: Wheaton’s Marmato stream charged inside Marmato’s realised price at deck × 0.920 and its deferred revenue excluded from the bridge; Wheaton’s Toroparu stream charged inside the study’s own cash flow and its deferred revenue likewise excluded; the Gold Notes’ gold premium bridged as a re-marked gold-linked liability. Known data gaps: (1) the reclamation provision is discounted at a 12.0% Colombian pre-tax risk-free rate, not at this model’s 5% real rate, so net asset value is overstated by the difference — bounded by the US$61.1 m undiscounted figure at US$0.22/share, and closed by a re-strike of the provision at the model’s rate; (2) group sustaining capital is disclosed from FY2025 only, so the FY2026 figure is H1 2026 annualised rather than guided — direction unknown, bounded at roughly ±US$0.10/share on the FCF-yield leg, and closed by a guided sustaining-capital line; (3) Marmato has no cost guidance until the plant reaches commercial production, so its unit cost is calibrated to H1 2026 rather than guided — closed by the Company’s first Marmato cost guidance. No other line in Table 11 is carried as n/d: every 0.0 was found in the filing and every n/a is structural.

8. Near-term catalysts (1–3 years)

Table 20. Near-term catalysts (1–3 years)

Source: Aris Mining Q2 2026 MD&A , Project Development Highlights and note 10b; 2026 production and cost guidance , 21 January 2026; technical reports cited in Section 2. Timing reflects Company guidance and is not guaranteed.

9. Rating & verdict

Aris is scored on this series’ company scorecard — the same nine dimensions on the same ★1–5 scale, against the peer set declared in Section 2.8 — on the producer/operator weighting: dimensions 1 Asset quality, 2 Cost, 3 Reserves and life, 5 Balance sheet and 6 Capital allocation are dominant at 15% each; 4 Growth, 7 Management, 8 Jurisdiction and 9 ESG carry 6.25% each. No dimension is N/A for this archetype.

Table 21. The Aris Mining scorecard

Weighted average = 0.60 + 0.45 + 0.60 + 0.75 + 0.60 + 0.3125 + 0.25 + 0.125 + 0.25 = 3.94/5 → rounds to the published ★★★★, Solid.

Source: this series’ nine-dimension company scorecard at the producer weighting; the evidence behind every star is in Sections 2–8, each rationale naming its home section. Peer basis: the Section 2.8 Americas-focused gold producer set.

The two-axis verdict. Quality Solid (★★★★) × Value Undervalued as of 7 September 2026 → a re-rating candidate — cheap; name the catalyst. The quality axis is durable — it tracks the balance sheet, the reserve base and the pipeline, not the share price — and is strong on growth, balance sheet, reserves and asset quality, held back by cost position and the single-country concentration that shadows every dimension here. On the value axis, a blended base-case fair value of US$31.43/share on a conservative US$4,000/oz deck implies +56.8%, and the qualifier is not earned: the deep-bear blend sits 20% below the price, not the 25% that would flag a wide band. Against the US$20.05 close the market is pricing roughly US$3,060/oz of gold in perpetuity — below the entire 12-month range of daily closes. The targets carry a modest premium for reserves (Dim 3), the balance sheet (Dim 5) and capital allocation (Dim 6) against a discount for cost (Dim 2), jurisdiction (Dim 8) and a two-asset producing base (Dim 1), landing at 0.98× against the parity anchor. What tips the verdict is whether Marmato ramps on schedule, whether gold holds, and whether Soto Norte clears licensing without repeating the Santurbán precedent — the one place where this analysis and the only observable transaction on that project sharply disagree.

To go from this single-name view to the whole peer group — screening every listed gold producer on AISC, reserve life, net debt/EBITDA and P/NAV — explore Metal Pilot.

10. Sources, methodology & disclaimer

10.1 Sources, methodology & data vintage

Company filings. Form 40-F for FY2025 (11 March 2026) — the Annual Information Form, MD&A and audited statements; the interim statements and MD&A to 30 June 2026; the 2026 guidance release ; the FY2024 and FY2023 Forms 40-F for Table 4; and the Seasif early-warning report . Per-asset data are from the AIF’s §6.1–§6.4 property descriptions, summarising the NI 43-101 technical reports on Segovia (28 November 2025), Marmato (30 June 2022), Soto Norte (18 August 2025) and Toroparu (21 October 2025).

Market, gold-price and peer data. Share price, share count, enterprise value, the six-analyst consensus and the FY2021–FY2025 EV/EBITDA history: stockanalysis.com , read at the 4 September 2026 close (fundamentals from S&P Global Market Intelligence). Gold trailing, five-year and range figures: daily GC=F closes to 31 August 2026 via goldpricetracker.com ; the forecast cross-check deck is the LBMA July 2026 analyst survey . Colombia’s BB− rating is S&P Global Ratings, April 2026. Peer guidance is each company’s own, cited in Section 2.8.

Methodology. Section 7 applies the archetype method set in How to Value Commodity Stocks : a sum-of-the-parts net asset value at a scorecard-derived target P/NAV (50%), an EV/EBITDA read on the guidance year (30%) and an FCF-yield support read (20%), recomputed at every price on the fixed US$3,000–5,000/oz grid. The full input list is the assumptions box closing §7.6.

Figures deliberately not drawn. Three, each because no honest chart of it exists at this scale: an asset map — four assets across two countries do not reduce to a legible map, so the Section 2.1 portfolio table and the concentration paragraph carry that read; a group production-history chart — only FY2024 and FY2025 exist on a consistent post-merger basis, too short a series to plot, so the trend is stated in Section 2.7; and a financial-summary chart — a single revenue line would only repeat Table 4’s first row.

Known data gaps. Three, none load-bearing, each with its bound and closing document in the §7.6 assumptions box: the rehabilitation provision’s 12.0% Colombian discount rate (US$0.22/share), FY2026 sustaining capital annualised rather than guided, and Marmato’s unit cost calibrated rather than guided.

Re-run log. 7 September 2026, full re-run — rebuilt against the H1 2026 interim statements and MD&A, absent from the prior source set, with the market layer at the 4 September close. Those statements closed the gaps that had held the blend to two weighted methods, so it now runs three; the base deck is evidenced by printed trailing averages; both project rows re-discount on the studies’ own NPV-by-rate profiles; and a P/NAV ladder, deck-sensitivity table, free-cash-flow bridge and cross-check table were added. Blend US$31.43 (+56.8%), Undervalued, the prior “(wide band)” qualifier no longer earned. Four corrections: the 5%/8% gold royalty is Guyana’s, not Colombia’s; the Lead Independent Director is David Garofalo; the peer set was rebuilt because Orla Mining ceased to exist on 31 July 2026; and Aris did pay a dividend and repurchase shares in FY2022. Same date, pre-launch verification — Section 7 was rebuilt independently and reproduced all 105 published figures; two peer rows, three page citations and the opening note were corrected. Data as of 7 September 2026; refreshed on each annual report and on material events.

10.2 Disclaimer & disclosure

This analysis is for informational purposes only and is not investment advice; do your own research or consult a licensed advisor. It is a point-in-time snapshot as of 7 September 2026 — prices, multiples, targets and the gold price move, and figures are estimates as of that date. The two-axis verdict is an analytical read of quality and price, not a buy or sell instruction. This report was prepared with AI assistance; figures were sourced from Aris Mining’s filings and market data and reviewed, but readers should verify before acting. The author holds no position in Aris Mining Corporation.