First Majestic Silver (AG) — Stock Analysis 2026 [2.4]

Analysis as of 1 October 2026. A point-in-time snapshot, not an evergreen guide. Fundamentals come from First Majestic Silver’s 2025 Annual Information Form and audited financial statements (year ended 31 December 2025) and its Q2 2026 results (30 July 2026); market data is the NYSE close on 1 October 2026 ($17.66; 492.9 m basic, 501.6 m fully diluted shares). Rating: ★★½, Average — Overvalued (wide band) → Full: the market already sees it. Price deck: base silver $60/oz — the representative trailing average on the fixed $40–80 grid — with gold co-moved at $4,000/oz, and every grid price run as a scenario (deep bear $40 · $3,000 / bear $50 · $3,500 / base $60 · $4,000 / bull $70 · $4,500 / deep bull $80 · $5,000), the World Bank April 2026 forecast as a 0% cross-check — no spot price; 5% real discount rate. The share price embeds a market-implied deck of ~$126/oz silver. 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.

First Majestic Silver is the most silver-weighted of the large listed producers: four underground mines in Mexico that took 57% of their 2025 metal revenue from silver. The thesis in one line: a mid-sized, Mexico-only operator with short reserve lives, priced as if silver stayed far above even its January 2026 peak. Why now: the Gatos Silver deal and the 2025–26 silver rally lifted revenue 124% and filled the treasury, while $1.28 billion of Mexican tax reassessments and a 2027 Jerritt Canyon restart are still open. To screen First Majestic against every listed silver producer on grade, cost and reserve life, go to Metal Pilot.

1. Snapshot & thesis

First Majestic Silver Corp. (NYSE: AG; TSX: AG) is a silver-led producer/operator headquartered in Vancouver, with 5,535 employees and contractors. It runs four producing mines in Mexico — Los Gatos (70%, Chihuahua), Santa Elena (Sonora), San Dimas (Durango–Sinaloa) and La Encantada (Coahuila) — plus the suspended Jerritt Canyon gold mine in Nevada, the First Mint bullion facility and a silver stream on First Mining’s Springpole project. By archetype it is a producer, valued sum-of-the-parts, with gold and Los Gatos zinc and lead as material by-products; the full nine-dimension rubric applies (Section 9). (AgEq = silver-equivalent ounces; AISC = all-in sustaining cost; P&P = proven and probable reserves; M&I = measured and indicated resources; Moz = million ounces, koz = thousand ounces.)

Figure 1. First Majestic Silver in numbers

Figure data: the FY2025 audited financial statements (revenue, cost of sales, dividends), the FY2025 MD&A (production, EBITDA), the 2025 Annual Information Form (reserves) and the Q2 2026 financial statements (cash, debt); share price per stockanalysis.com , NYSE close 1 October 2026. Enterprise value, rating and valuation read per Sections 7 and 9.

Table 1. First Majestic Silver in numbers

Source: the FY2025 audited financial statements , FY2025 MD&A and 2025 Annual Information Form (reserves under NI 43-101 / CIM, struck at $35/oz silver and $3,100/oz gold, Los Gatos at 70%); the Q2 2026 production and guidance release , Q2 2026 MD&A and Q2 2026 financial statements ; share price per stockanalysis.com , 1 October 2026. Cash margin is revenue less cost of sales before depreciation, over revenue; net cash is cash less both convertible notes and the revolver at carrying value (Section 7 bridges the notes at face). Listed: Public (NYSE: AG / TSX: AG).

Thesis in brief. Bull: silver is the price that moves this company most — 57% of 2025 metal revenue, no hedges — and the business has turned: $526 m of operating cash flow in 2025 after four loss years, $1.09 bn of cash, a Los Gatos mine with the group’s lowest costs, and a Nevada gold restart that would add a non-Mexican mine from 2027. Bear: the mines are mid-sized and short-lived — 101 Moz of silver reserves is 6.5 years of 2025 output — all four sit in Mexico, which raised mining duties for 2025 and is reassessing $1.28 bn of San Dimas taxes, and the share count has nearly doubled since 2021. What tips it: the silver price, and whether the drill programme keeps converting resources into reserves faster than the mines deplete them. The rating and its rationale are in Section 9.

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

Silver averaged $63.63/oz over June–August 2026, after a January peak of $92.10. For how silver is priced and why silver miners carry more torque than the metal, see Silver — A Complete Market Guide ; this section spends its words on the company.

2.1 Portfolio overview & map

Table 2. Asset base (attributable)

Source: the 2025 Annual Information Form (reserves under NI 43-101 / CIM, effective 31 December 2025, Tables 1, 10, 16, 22 and 28; Jerritt Canyon Table 2), the FY2025 MD&A (production by mine) and the 8 July 2026 guidance release . Production is attributable (Los Gatos at 70% from 16 January 2025). Reserve life is the reserve tonnage left at 30 June 2026 over the first-half 2026 milling rate, doubled — the basis Section 7 runs on; for Los Gatos it is the AIF’s 9.4-year plan less the half-year mined. The group AISC adds $2.69–2.86/AgEq oz of corporate cost to the mines’. Every asset is operated by First Majestic. Listed: Public (NYSE: AG / TSX: AG).

Concentration. All four producing mines are Mexican, and three of them — Los Gatos, Santa Elena and San Dimas — earned 88% of 2025 segment revenue (Figure 3). A proportional-symbol asset map is not drawn here (Section 10.1); the table and this paragraph carry its read.

2.2 Where the revenue and the value sit

Figure 2. Revenue by metal, 2025

Figure data: the FY2025 audited financial statements , Note 6, “Gross revenue from payable metals” — silver $724.3 m, gold $409.4 m, zinc $87.7 m, lead $41.0 m, copper $2.7 m; shares computed to one decimal (the note prints whole percentages).

Figure 3. Revenue by asset, 2025

Figure data: the FY2025 audited financial statements , Note 5, “Segmented Information” — Los Gatos $489.8 m (consolidated at 100%, 30% owed to the non-controlling interest), Santa Elena $346.4 m, San Dimas $301.6 m, La Encantada $100.9 m, First Mint $49.4 m and Jerritt Canyon $1.3 m. First Mint buys its silver from the mines, hence the elimination.

Silver leads the metal split, but gold is a third of revenue. By asset, three mines each bring in a quarter to two-fifths; La Encantada trails.

2.3 Los Gatos

Los Gatos, in Chihuahua, came with the Gatos Silver acquisition that closed on 16 January 2025. First Majestic holds 70% of the Los Gatos Joint Venture; Dowa Metals & Mining holds 30%, has offtake rights on the zinc concentrate, and under the amended joint-venture agreement effective 1 January 2025 major decisions need 90% of the participating interests — in practice a Dowa veto — while First Majestic earns a $6 m annual management fee. It is a high-grade underground silver-zinc-lead mine: in 2025 it milled 867,467 attributable tonnes at 240 g/t silver and produced 5.87 Moz of silver, 56.7 Mlb of zinc and 32.3 Mlb of lead (70%) at an AISC of $15.15/AgEq oz, the group’s lowest. Reserves are 35.28 Moz of silver in 9.55 Mt at 115 g/t (70%), and the mine plan runs 9.4 years from January 2026. The La Cuesta royalty ended in Q3 2025; the mine now carries none. The asset-level risk is grade: the first half of 2026 milled 204 g/t against a 115 g/t reserve, so unit costs rise as the plan moves into lower-grade stopes — guidance is already $20.35–21.11/AgEq oz for 2026, while throughput rises to 4,000 tonnes per operating day in the second half.

2.4 Santa Elena

Santa Elena, in Sonora, combines the Santa Elena underground mine, the Ermitaño mine and a leach pad around one plant, and is the group’s gold mine: 88.1 koz of gold and 1.42 Moz of silver in 2025, from 1.10 Mt at 2.65 g/t gold, at an AISC of $17.96/AgEq oz. Reserves are 11.14 Moz of silver and 0.25 Moz of gold in 6.30 Mt, two-thirds of it at Ermitaño at 1.35 g/t gold — about half the 2.65 g/t milled in 2025. Two encumbrances apply at their filed terms: Royal Gold (formerly Sandstorm) takes 20% of the gold from the leach pad and a designated area at the lesser of market and $487.3/oz, and Ermitaño carries a 2% NSR to Minera Inmet and a 2% NSR to Osisko — $14.0 m of royalties in 2025. Growth is next door: the plant is expanding from 3,200 to 3,500 tonnes a day, underground mining at Santa Elena resumed on 15 May 2026, and the Navidad (6.42 Mt inferred, 89 g/t silver, 2.21 g/t gold) and Santo Niño discoveries received portal permits in June 2026. The key risk is the grade step-down to reserve.

2.5 San Dimas

San Dimas, on the Durango–Sinaloa border, has been First Majestic’s since the May 2018 acquisition of Primero Mining. It produced 5.39 Moz of silver and 55.7 koz of gold in 2025 from 928,352 t at 203 g/t silver and 2.00 g/t gold, at an AISC of $19.62/AgEq oz. Reserves are 23.16 Moz of silver and 0.289 Moz of gold in 3.70 Mt at 195 g/t and 2.43 g/t — under four years at the current milling rate — but the mine has replaced its ounces for decades, and 2026’s 117,000 m drilling programme returned new high-grade intercepts in September. The encumbrance is Wheaton Precious Metals’ stream on 25% of gold-equivalent production, at a fixed 70:1 silver-to-gold ratio and the lesser of market and $641/oz (rising 1% a year; $648/oz in Q2 2026) — 31,539 oz delivered in 2025. San Dimas is also the subject of the SAT tax reassessments (Section 6).

2.6 La Encantada

La Encantada, in Coahuila, is a silver-only mine that blends underground ore with reprocessed tailings: 2.76 Moz of silver in 2025 from 1.11 Mt at 114 g/t and 68% recovery, at an AISC of $29.26/AgEq oz, the group’s highest. Its 31.50 Moz probable reserve includes 15.63 Moz in the No. 4 tailings deposit, which lengthens the life to 2032 in the company’s cost tables but at a 25% tailings recovery. A Metalla royalty takes the first 1,000 oz of gold a year ($0.3 m in 2025), and the 2025 technical report gives no economic analysis. At 2026 guidance of $31.18–32.36/AgEq oz it is the mine most exposed to a lower silver price.

2.7 Jerritt Canyon

Jerritt Canyon (Nevada) is held 100% through Jerritt Canyon Gold LLC, bought from Sprott Mining in April 2021, and has been suspended since March 2023. It holds no reserves but carries 4.10 Moz of M&I gold (54.26 Mt at 2.35 g/t) and 3.66 Moz inferred. On 2 April 2026 the company committed $75 m in 2026 to restart it — of which $9.8 m was spent in the first half. First production is targeted for the second half of 2027; no year-by-year ramp is published before the Stantec pre-feasibility study due in Q4 2026. Approvals outstanding: Nevada’s regulator approval of an updated reclamation plan, expected in mid-2026, with bonding to rise by $23–27 m; 14 notices of alleged air-permit violations from 2021–22 remain under appeal. Encumbrances: NSRs of 1.5–10% on certain claims, a 33% NSR on fee land, a per-ton royalty on the processing facilities and a 0.5% NSR over the property to Gold Royalty. Its $119.3 m reclamation provision is the group’s largest.

2.8 Other assets & the pipeline

San Martín (Jalisco), idle since July 2019 and under the de facto control of an organised criminal group, is being sold to Flextronics Supply and Service for $90 m in cash under a 6 July 2026 agreement, most of it payable from 2027 to 2032; closing awaits Mexican antitrust approval. Del Toro was sold to Sierra Madre Gold and Silver, closing 19 June 2026, for $20 m in cash and $10 m in Sierra Madre shares, with up to $30 m deferred and contingent. First Mint sold 1.07 Moz of silver as bullion in 2025, at $46.32/oz. The Springpole stream — 50% of payable silver from First Mining’s Ontario gold project, at 33% of spot capped at $7.50/oz — gained a positive federal environmental-assessment decision on 30 June 2026.

2.9 Group production, reserves & costs

Table 3. Production and cost by mine

Source: the FY2025 MD&A (mine tables and Key Performance Metrics), the Q2 2026 MD&A (six months to 30 June 2026) and the 8 July 2026 updated guidance . AISC in $ per AgEq ounce, the company’s basis (gold at a fixed 75:1 in the guidance); the group AISC includes corporate costs. Group 2025 gold includes 342 oz from Jerritt Canyon.

Table 4. Mineral reserves and resources, 31 December 2025

Source: the 2025 Annual Information Form , Tables 1–3 (proven and probable reserves; measured and indicated, and inferred, resources), prepared under NI 43-101 / CIM, effective 31 December 2025; reserves at $35/oz silver and $3,100/oz gold (Los Gatos also $1.25/lb zinc, $0.95/lb lead), resources at $38.50 and $3,400. M&I is inclusive of reserves. Mineral resources are not mineral reserves and have no demonstrated economic viability. Jerritt Canyon adds 4.10 Moz of M&I gold and 3.66 Moz inferred; the 31 March 2026 release’s “101.7 million ounces” of silver reserves is a typo for the 101.07 Moz the AIF tables sum to.

Figure 4. Attributable silver production, 2022–2026

Figure data: the FY2024 MD&A (2022–2024, “Silver Ounces Produced”), the FY2025 MD&A (2025) and the 8 July 2026 guidance (2026). Earlier years are outside the filings in the source set.

Costs. The 2025 group AISC of $21.17/AgEq oz rises to $27.69–28.77 in the 2026 guidance — partly price-linked (worker profit-sharing alone is $2.16–2.29/AgEq oz) and partly grade, as Los Gatos and Santa Elena mine toward reserve grade. Reserves. 101.07 Moz of silver is 6.5 years of 2025 output, and every mine but Los Gatos is under six years at its first-half 2026 milling rate. The company’s answer is conversion: 145.30 Moz of M&I and 113.47 Moz of inferred silver sit beside the plans, and 2026 drilling was raised to about 308,000 m. Those are resources, not reserves — the valuation credits them in one risked row (Section 7).

2.10 Peer positioning

The peer set for every “vs peers” claim is the listed silver and silver-gold producers of more than 15 Moz a year: Fresnillo, Pan American Silver, Coeur Mining and Hecla Mining. None was under an unclosed takeover on 1 October 2026.

Table 5. Peer positioning — quality metrics, 2025

Source: each company’s own 2025 filings — Fresnillo 2025 preliminary results , Coeur 2025 fourth-quarter results and year-end 2025 reserves , Hecla 2025 results and year-end 2025 reserves ; Pan American per its 2025 MD&A , 2025 financial statements and 2026 guidance release ; First Majestic per Tables 1–3 here. Cash margin = revenue less cost of sales excluding depreciation, over revenue. Reserve life = silver reserves ÷ 2025 silver output (Pan American’s is 8.2 years excluding Escobal); guidance change = midpoint of 2026 silver guidance against 2025 output. Screen the silver producers on grade, cost and reserve life at Metal Pilot.

First Majestic is the smallest of the five by silver output and has the shortest reserve life by a margin; its cash margin is second only to Fresnillo’s, and it is the only one besides Fresnillo with all its production in Mexico.

3. Financials & balance sheet

Table 6. Five-year financial summary (years ended 31 December)

Source: the audited consolidated financial statements for 2025 (2025, 2024), 2023 (2023) and 2022 (2022, 2021) — revenue, cost of sales, net earnings, EPS, cash flows, debt (Note 21), shares and dividends (Note 25); sustaining capital and EBITDA from the FY2025 and FY2024 MD&As (non-GAAP). Net debt = debt facilities (convertible notes and revolver at carrying value) less cash; EBITDA as the MD&A reports it ($33.4 m in 2022, −$41.8 m in 2023, $127.1 m in 2024, $686.1 m in 2025; 2021 not in the source set). Cash margin as Table 1; 2023 includes $13.4 m of standby costs. 2021’s dividend per share and 2021–2022 sustaining capital are not in the filings in hand (the FY2022 and FY2023 MD&As are outside the source set). Sustaining capital is the MD&A’s attributable measure, all-in capex the cash-flow statement’s consolidated one.

2022–2024 were loss years — weak silver and the Jerritt Canyon suspension, impaired $125.2 m in 2023 — and free cash flow was negative three years in four. 2025 changed scale: Los Gatos and a rising silver price doubled revenue, operating cash flow ($526.0 m) ran well ahead of attributable earnings ($164.9 m), as it should with $263.4 m of depreciation, and the first half of 2026 added $445.4 m more. Read against the Financial Metrics for Commodity Investing guide: the margin is real but price-made (the 2025 realised price was $41.52 per AgEq ounce, H1 2026 $74.83 per silver ounce); the cash backs the profit; the red flag is dilution — weighted diluted shares rose from 244.7 m to 484.6 m in four years, through at-the-market issues in 2021–2024 and the 177.4 m shares paid for Gatos — and capex is mostly discretionary, with attributable sustaining capital of $55.4 m in 2025 against $210.7 m of consolidated cash capex.

Table 7. Balance sheet and liquidity, 30 June 2026

Source: the Q2 2026 condensed interim financial statements — statement of financial position, Notes 14, 19, 21, 22 and 25; the Jerritt Canyon provision from the FY2025 statements , Note 23.

Leverage and liquidity. Net cash is $790.6 m and liquidity $1.04 bn, so leverage does not bind at any price on the Section 7 grid: on 2025 EBITDA of $686.1 m the company carries no net debt. The two real claims on that cash are the $286.1 m of income taxes payable and the $1.28 bn of SAT reassessments (Section 6) — $138.9 m of cash is already frozen against them. The rehabilitation provision of $188.3 m is mostly Jerritt Canyon, where bonding is expected to rise by $23–27 m. The hedge book: the company does not use long-term derivatives against silver or gold and held only $0.1 m of short-term currency contracts at 30 June 2026 — unhedged. Capital returns: the dividend was raised from 1% to 2% of net revenue from January 2026, 1.2 m shares were bought back in the second quarter for $22.7 m, and no at-the-market shares have been sold since 2024.

Table 8. Cost deck handed to the valuation

Source: the 8 July 2026 guidance release (AISC build and price assumptions), the 2025 Annual Information Form (Risk Factors — Taxation; stream and royalty terms), the FY2025 financial statements (Note 24 tax pools; Note 6 royalties) and the Q2 2026 MD&A and statements (grades, Wheaton price, cash tax). No cost-inflation rate is disclosed; the AISC trend stands in for it.

4. Management, strategy & corporate structure

4.1 Management & governance

Keith Neumeyer founded First Majestic in 2001 and has run it since — President and CEO until December 2025, CEO since; he was the founding President of First Quantum Minerals and chairs First Mining Gold, the Springpole stream counterparty. He owns 4.73 m shares, about 0.96%. Mani Alkhafaji, who led the Gatos acquisition, became President and Chief Corporate Development Officer on 1 January 2026; Steven Holmes, COO since February 2020, came from Barrick and KGHM International; Neil Beaumont became CFO on 2 July 2026, succeeding David Soares, who had held the role since March 2022. The board has six directors, five independent, chaired by Thomas F. Fudge, Jr., a mining engineer from Tahoe Resources and Hecla, with Audit (chair Colette Rustad), Compensation, Corporate Governance & Nominating (chair Marjorie Co) and Sustainability (chair Raymond Polman, the CFO until 2021) committees.

Governance is where shareholders have pushed back. In 2025 the say-on-pay vote failed with 41.01% support and Fudge was re-elected with 50.44%; after outreach to 16 large holders both recovered in June 2026, to 65.64% and 69.87%. Neumeyer was paid $6.61 m in 2025. Neumeyer and Polman both sit on First Mining’s board and audit committee — a disclosed interlock on a related party in which First Majestic exercised 32.1 m warrants in December 2025.

4.2 Strategy & capital allocation

The stated aim is to be the world’s largest primary silver producer, buying only silver assets with low costs and exploration upside, while the treasury builds. The 2026 plan, raised on 8 July, spends $318–344 m of capital — $62–70 m sustaining and $256–274 m expansionary, of which $75 m restarts Jerritt Canyon and $41–45 m is exploration — to lift Los Gatos to 4,000 tonnes per operating day, expand Santa Elena to 3,500 tonnes a day and drill about 308,000 m. Returns run through the dividend (2% of net revenue) and a buyback of up to 24.5 m shares that expires on 13 October 2026.

4.3 Ownership & corporate structure

No holder owns more than 10%; directors and officers together hold about 1.05%. The producing mines are held through Mexican subsidiaries — Primero Empresa Minera (San Dimas), Nusantara de México (Santa Elena), Minera La Encantada and, at 70%, the Los Gatos Joint Venture entities — with Jerritt Canyon Gold LLC and First Mint LLC in the US. After share sales in October and November 2025 it held 19.07% of Silver Storm and 27.72% of Sierra Madre, before the Sierra Madre shares received for Del Toro in June 2026.

Table 9. Major transactions, 2018–2026

Source: the 2025 Annual Information Form (General Development of the Business; Capital Structure), the FY2025 and 2022 financial statements (Note 4, acquisitions; Note 21, debt), the Q2 2026 MD&A (Del Toro; Springpole) and the San Martín sale release , 7 July 2026.

5. ESG & sustainability

Table 10. ESG snapshot

Source: the 2025 Sustainability Report and its data download (safety, emissions, water, tailings), the 2025 Annual Information Form (power, Jerritt Canyon) and the Q2 2026 MD&A (Q2 2026 safety).

Injury rates halved between 2022 and 2024 and held there, LNG and hydro power cut Scope 1 and 2 emissions 36% from the 2019 baseline, and ISS ESG ranks the company in the top 10% of miners. The open items are Jerritt Canyon’s air-permit notices and San Martín, whose tailings facility the company cannot reach while criminals control the site.

6. Risks

Table 11. Risk register

Source: the risk factors in the 2025 Annual Information Form and the Q2 2026 financial statements , Note 27 (contingencies); the 2025 and 2026 voting results. Likelihood and impact are the author’s assessment, not company figures.

Figure 5. Risk matrix — likelihood against impact

Figure data: Table 11; each point prints its likelihood × impact score, and the shaded region is the high-likelihood, high-impact quadrant. Ratings are the author’s assessment, not company figures.

The top-right corner is where the thesis breaks: a lower silver price and Mexico compound, because a high-cost, Mexico-only producer has no other region or margin to fall back on. The SAT dispute is the risk most specific to First Majestic: Mexico’s Supreme Court declined to hear the 2012 appeal in October 2025, the company accrued $147.2 m, and the rest of 2010–2018 remains open — including a $115 m reassessment for 2018 issued in April 2026. Section 7 bridges only the accrued year and prices the open years as a sensitivity: −$0.92 a share at an expected value, −$2.22 if all are lost.

7. Valuation

Valuation as of 1 October 2026, in US dollars (First Majestic reports in US dollars and the valuation is struck on the NYSE listing, so no FX conversion is needed). Horizon: spot fair value. Price deck: base silver $60/oz — the 3-month trailing average of $63.63/oz (June–August 2026), against a 6-month average of $70.45 and a 12-month average of $66.80, all monthly averages per the World Bank Pink Sheet release of 2 September 2026, the latest before the valuation date. The 3-month window is the representative one because the 6- and 12-month windows still carry the January 2026 peak of $92.10; it sits nearest the $60 grid price. Every grid price from $40 to $80/oz is run as a scenario (deep bear $40 / bear $50 / base $60 / bull $70 / deep bull $80). Gold, 36.7% of enterprise NAV, is decked at $4,000/oz — its own 3-month average of $4,237 (6-month $4,479, 12-month $4,398, same series) taken to the nearest price of the $3,000–5,000 gold grid — and co-moves step-for-step with silver in every scenario (silver $50 pairs with gold $3,500), because the two are a documented co-moving pair (five-year monthly correlation 0.95, same series); the ratio is not fixed, and Figure 8 and Table 18 price a move in gold alone. Zinc (7.8% of enterprise NAV) and lead (3.0%) are by-products held in every column at their 3-month averages taken to their grids: zinc $2,800 / 3,200 / 3,600 / 4,000 / 4,400/t ($3,671 → $3,600), lead $1,600 / 1,800 / 2,000 / 2,200 / 2,400/t ($1,881 → $1,800); copper is unpaid under the Los Gatos concentrate terms. The World Bank’s April 2026 outlook (silver $70.0 for 2026 and $65.0 for 2027; gold $4,700 and $4,300) is an unweighted cross-check; no spot deck is carried. Discount rate 5% real, after tax — the precious-metals convention, sensitised 4–7%. Share price $17.66 (NYSE close, 1 October 2026); 492.9 m basic and 501.553 m fully diluted shares; balance sheet as of 30 June 2026.

First Majestic is valued on the producer (mining) archetype, run as a sum-of-the-parts of four producing Mexican mines — Los Gatos at its 70% — plus the Jerritt Canyon restart, the 2026 growth capital still to spend and a resource tier. The method is set out in The Commodity Investor, Part 11: How to Value Commodity Stocks ; this section applies it without re-teaching it. The blended fair value is $6.59 per share at the base prices ($60 silver, $4,000 gold), $4.89 at $50 and $3,500, and $8.31 at $70 and $4,500; each co-moved step moves NAV per share by $1.04 — $0.80 of it from $10/oz of silver and $0.23 from $500/oz of gold (Table 18). The producing mines plus the whole equity bridge are worth $2.83 per share, Jerritt Canyon $0.44 and the resource beyond the plans $0.44.

What §7 starts from. The figures below set the mine builds, the tax basis, the restart value and the bridge. Everything else §7 takes from a filing or a market series is in the register at §10.1 (Table 29).

Table 12. Load-bearing inputs — the filed figures the valuation moves on

Source: the 2025 Annual Information Form (reserves and resources effective 31 December 2025, NI 43-101); the Q2 2026 production and updated guidance release (8 July 2026); the Q2 2026 MD&A and condensed interim consolidated financial statements, 30 June 2026 (30 July 2026); the FY2025 financial statements ; monthly averages per the World Bank Pink Sheet . Pages are those of each filed document as rendered on EDGAR; the AIF’s are its printed page numbers. All figures in US dollars. Reserves are effective 31 December 2025, guidance 8 July 2026 and the balance sheet 30 June 2026 — the section’s vintages, each printed with its row. The share price the section is read against ($17.66, 1 October 2026) is in the opening block, not here: it moves the rating, not the valuation. The full register — every figure §7 takes from outside this analysis — is Table 29 in §10.1.

7.1 Method selection

The weights are the producer default — NAV 50% / EV/EBITDA 30% / FCF-yield support 20% — without deviation: Jerritt Canyon and the resource tier are inside the NAV, each in its own row, and the two cash-flow reads are there because they see only the producing mines. The third slice is FCF-yield support because every line it needs is in the 2026 guidance and the cost build behind it.

Table 13. 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% (one method); cash-flow 50% (two methods, at the ceiling for two reads of the same cash flow, stated here); asset & capacity and transaction 0%. Target multiples are derived in §7.3 from the archetype anchors, not from a peer set.

7.2 Net asset value

Vehicle map. Three producing mines sit in wholly-owned Mexican subsidiaries and Los Gatos in a 70%-owned, consolidated joint venture with Dowa (30%); nothing inside one line reappears in another. Each encumbrance is charged once, on its filed terms, in the row it burdens.

Table 14. Vehicle map

Source: this analysis; ownership and the stream, royalty and joint-venture terms per the 2025 Annual Information Form (Santa Elena p.41; Los Gatos material contracts) and the Q2 2026 financial statements , Notes 6, 16, 24 and 28.

Tax basis and the pools. Every mine block takes the statutory rate on cash margin, no depreciation shield: Mexico’s 8.5% Special Mining Duty, deductible against the 30% income tax, for 35.95%. Workers’ profit sharing (10%), the 1% environmental duty and the royalties are already inside the guided AISC, so they are not charged again. The FY2025 income-tax note shows $498.5 m of Mexican non-capital losses; the shield is declined, biasing NAV down by at most $498.5 m × 30% ÷ 501.553 m = $0.30 per share. The provision is bridged from the statements at the $188.3 m carrying value; the rows’ AISC carries only its accretion.

Reserve lives. Each block runs the reserve’s own tonnes and grades, depleted by H1 2026 milling and production to the 30 June 2026 build date, at the H1 2026 throughput (Los Gatos on its 9.4-year plan) and the 2026 guided AISC per tonne. Santa Elena and Los Gatos are mining well above reserve grade — 2.36 g/t gold against a 1.25 g/t reserve, 204 g/t silver against 115 g/t — so the reserve-average revenue per year sits well below 2026’s. Reserve-only lives understate an operator that has replaced its mines for decades; the resource-conversion row is where that sits, and nothing else lengthens a plan.

Stage risk is charged once. Jerritt Canyon has no reserve and no study yet (a pre-feasibility study is due in Q4 2026; production is targeted for H2 2027), so it enters at the in-situ value of its 4.10 Moz of M&I rather than a risked study NPV — the stage risk is in that unit value, the row weight is 1.00 and neither the rate nor the target P/NAV carries a second charge. The resource tier converts at the band floor, 0.25×. Producing rows are 1.00.

Funding. No equity raise is modelled: the $187.5 m of 2026 growth capital still to spend is 2.2% of the $8,704.7 m market capitalisation and covered by $1,093.3 m of cash; next-twelve-month free cash flow after all capital is positive at every grid price but the $40 one (§7.6), and the share count holds at 501.553 m in every scenario.

The per-asset NPV build. Reserves are NI 43-101 / CIM proven and probable, the basis of every NAV figure in this section. One block per asset at 5% real, end-year, discounted to the 30 June 2026 balance-sheet date so the NAV and the bridge sit on one date.

Table 15. Per-asset NPV build — base case ($60/oz silver, $4,000/oz gold, 5% real)

Notes to Table 15

1. The resource-stage gold anchor, $75 per ounce of M&I, is used because Jerritt Canyon has no reserve and no study to risk; the 3.66 Moz of inferred is carried at 0.0 and priced as optionality in §7.5. The restart budget still to spend is charged: $75.0 m less the $9.8 m the segment note prints as Jerritt Canyon’s capital in H1 2026 (Q2 2026 FS, Note 5, p.17), so block 5 carries only the Mexican and corporate remainder.
2. The company reports M&I inclusive of reserves, so exclusive M&I is computed as inclusive less reserves, metal by metal, and expressed in silver-equivalent ounces at the base prices; Los Gatos copper is left out because it is unpaid. The unit value is each mine’s NPV divided by its remaining contained reserve in the same units.
3. The band floor, because the 2025 additions came mostly from a higher reserve price ($35/oz silver against $26) and La Encantada’s tailings at a 25% recovery rather than from discovery, and San Dimas, Santa Elena and La Encantada still run four to six years; the factor rises to 0.30× and 0.35× in the two bull columns.

Source: this analysis, from the 2025 Annual Information Form (reserve tables p.36, p.49, p.62, p.79; recoveries and payables p.37, p.49, p.63; La Encantada costs p.83; resources p.24), the Q2 2026 MD&A (H1 2026 mine tables p.18–24; capital p.13–14; Jerritt Canyon p.27), the Q2 2026 production and guidance release (p.5–6), the Q2 2026 financial statements (Notes 6, 16) and the Jerritt Canyon restart release (2 April 2026); La Encantada’s silver payable per its 2025 technical report (NSR assumptions, p.141). Payable silver-equivalent ounces at the guidance prices are the guided metal × each mine’s payable share, gold at 75:1 and base metals at the guidance prices ÷ $52. Santa Elena’s gold is the domains’ tonnes × grade (253.0 koz against the 0.25 Moz the AIF rounds to); La Encantada’s underground tonnes are the printed 7.87 Mt total less the 4.37 Mt of tailings (the two underground rows round to 3.51 Mt). Rows are numbered in the first column and the count restarts in every block, so a Derived cell’s row 4 ÷ row 5 points inside its own block; the accent band names the block. Values computed on unrounded inputs.

Table 16. Per-asset model — base case ($60/oz silver, $4,000/oz gold, 5% real)

Source: this analysis, from the filings cited under Table 15. Every NPV in the last column reproduces from its block in Table 15; this table adds the stage, profile, cost, capital, tax and discounting inputs behind them. Guided AISC is per payable silver-equivalent ounce at the company’s $52/oz silver and $3,900/oz gold and includes profit sharing, royalties, the environmental duty, leases and sustaining capital; it was revised on 8 July 2026 with H1’s prices in it.

Table 17. NAV build-up and equity bridge (base case — $60/oz silver, $4,000/oz gold, 5% real)

Notes to Table 17

1. Only the recognised SAT liability is in the bridge: the 2012 PEM reassessment, lost in the domestic courts and accrued at $147.2 m against $211.9 m reassessed, sits inside income taxes payable in row 13. The open years are an unrecognised contingency (field 11), priced here as a sensitivity, not a charge: at an expected value of 0.695 × (50% × $1,055.5 m + 25% × $546.1 m) = $461.5 m, NAV per share falls by $0.92; losing every assessment at the 2012 realisation (0.695 × $1,601.6 m) takes it down $2.22; winning every one leaves it where it is. The 0.695 is what the company booked when it lost 2012. The 50% applies to the unaccrued PEM years (2010, 2011, 2013, 2014–16, 2017 and 2018), because the domestic courts made 2012 final on the same facts while the APA case and the $1.09 bn NAFTA claim are undecided; the 25% to the La Encantada, La Parrilla, Del Toro and CFM assessments, which the company judges not probable and on which no court has ruled against it. San Martín’s $27.5 m leaves with El Pilón. The $138.9 m frozen by the SAT counts in every outcome — returned or applied.

Source: this analysis; rows are numbered in the first column and run straight down the bridge — the memo lines beneath the result carry no number because nothing steps through them — and every balance-sheet line per the condensed interim consolidated financial statements, 30 June 2026 (p.7; Notes 13, 14, 16, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28); site provisions per the FY2025 financial statements (Note 23) and the 2025 AIF (p.116); the San Martín schedule per the sale release (7 July 2026), closing assumed at 31 December 2026. Post-period events bridged: the July dividend and the San Martín sale; the 0.25 m shares issued between 30 June and 29 July are in the count. The tiers are printed to three decimals so they sum to the published NAV per share: 2.833 + 0.442 + 0.437 = 3.712 → $3.71 — and the producing tier alone sits 84% below the $17.66 price, so the market pays about $13.95 a share above everything the NAV counts. The 2027 notes as debt rather than shares give $3.63, within 5%, so one count is published. Net cash in row 6 is $1,085.5 m against the $790.6 m in §1 and §3, which deduct all debt at its $302.8 m carrying value: the bridge instead carries the 2031 notes at their $350.0 m face in row 11 and the in-the-money 2027 notes as 3.339 m shares in row 16, and deducts the $7.5 m July dividend. Values computed on unrounded inputs.

Figure 6. NAV build-up and equity bridge

Figure data: Table 17. Equity NAV of $1,861.8 m equates to $3.71 per fully diluted share; the producing tier alone is $2.83. “Net cash & hedge” is rows 6–7; “WC & tax” is row 13, the working-capital line with the taxes payable; the stream line is $0.0 m.

Figure 7. NAV/share sensitivity — silver price (gold co-moved) × discount rate

		Silver price ($/oz), gold co-moved
		40Au 3,000	50Au 3,500	Base60 · Au 4,000	70Au 4,500	80Au 5,000
Discount rate	4%	$1.65	$2.72	$3.78	$4.85	$5.92
	5% (base)	$1.64	$2.68	$3.71	$4.75	$5.78
	7%	$1.63	$2.60	$3.58	$4.55	$5.53

Notes to Figure 7

1. Checksum — the $50 · Au 3,500 column at 5%: mines $921.6 m (San Dimas $321.9 m, Santa Elena $114.5 m, La Encantada $113.0 m, Los Gatos $372.2 m) − $120.8 m capital + Jerritt Canyon $221.8 m + resource $143.9 m = $1,166.5 m; bridge +$175.8 m → $1,342.3 m ÷ 501.553 m = $2.68.
2. Rate rows — the mine blocks, the capital block, Jerritt Canyon’s restart and holding costs, the resource row and the capitalised corporate cost re-discount directly; the San Martín receivable moves on the nominal equivalent of each rate. Jerritt Canyon’s in-situ value carries no rate. Risk weights are held; they move only in the scenarios (§7.6).
3. Cost — each mine’s AISC +10% at the base prices takes NAV per share to $3.26 (−12.2%); both prices +10% ($66 and $4,400) with costs following at half the rate (+5%) give $4.15 (+11.9%), against $4.38 (+18.0%) on price alone.
4. FX — n/a for the valuation currency: First Majestic reports in US dollars and the section is struck on the NYSE listing. The operating exposure is the peso; the financial-risk note prints a 10% move in the peso and the Canadian dollar as $13.8 m on net monetary assets at 30 June 2026 — $8.8 m of it the peso and $5.0 m the Canadian dollar (Q2 2026 FS, Note 25, p.49) — and FX derivatives were $0.1 m.
5. Stage risk — n/a: no risked study tranche is in the NAV, and Jerritt Canyon, at 13.2% of enterprise NAV, is carried at an in-situ value per ounce rather than a risk weight.
6. Schedule slip — Jerritt Canyon is 13.2% of enterprise NAV: moving its remaining restart capital one year later and adding a further year of holding costs ($18 m) gives $3.69 (−$0.03); the in-situ value does not move with timing. The milestones that would do it are the pre-feasibility study due in Q4 2026 and the H2 2027 production target (restart release, 2 April 2026).
7. Second deck — gold co-moves step-for-step on its own grid, so the columns carry $3,000 / 3,500 / 4,000 / 4,500 / 5,000 gold beside $40–80 silver. Gold one step down alone ($3,500, silver held at $60, 5%) gives $3.48 (−$0.23, −6.2%). Jerritt Canyon, 35.8% of the gold exposure, is carried at an in-situ value that does not move with the gold price. Zinc and lead are held at their bases in every column.

Figure data: this analysis’ model (Tables 15–17), every cell recomputed at that column’s prices and that row’s rate, never scaled. Price columns are the fixed silver grid, grid version 2026-09 ($40–80/oz), with gold co-moved on its own 2026-09 grid ($3,000–5,000/oz); base case $60 and $4,000 at 5% real. A one-step co-moved move shifts NAV per share by about ±$1.04, or ±28%; the deck sensitivity is tabulated in Table 18.

Figure 8. NAV/share — silver price × gold price, 5% real

		Silver price ($/oz)
		40	50	Base60	70	80
Gold price ($/oz)	3,000	$1.64	$2.45	$3.25	$4.06	$4.86
	3,500	$1.87	$2.68	$3.48	$4.29	$5.09
	4,000 (base)	$2.10	$2.91	$3.71	$4.52	$5.32
	4,500	$2.33	$3.14	$3.94	$4.75	$5.55
	5,000	$2.57	$3.37	$4.17	$4.98	$5.78

Notes to Figure 8

1. Checksum — $50 silver and $4,000 gold at 5% gives $2.91; the cell one gold step below it ($50 and $3,500) is $2.68, the Figure 7 bear cell, so the two grids agree on the diagonal.

Figure data: this analysis’ model, every cell recomputed at that column’s silver price and that row’s gold price, 5% real, never scaled. Columns are the fixed silver grid and rows the fixed gold grid, both grid version 2026-09; base case $60 and $4,000. The scenario columns of Table 25 run down this grid’s diagonal ($40 · $3,000 → $80 · $5,000); a reader who holds silver at $70 and gold at $4,000 reads the cell straight off the grid.

Deck sensitivity. The slope between grid prices, to move the valuation to any silver and gold view; the Linear over column gives where each per-step figure adds up to the cent.

Table 18. Deck sensitivity — value per step of the silver and gold grids ($/share unless stated; base rate, risk weights and target multiples held)

Source: this analysis, Tables 15–17 and 25. % of base is each line’s one-step move divided by its own base-price value — a leverage read. Every row is linear across the grid because no mine margin turns negative between $40 and $80 silver; the FCF-per-share line crosses zero near $42.9/oz silver with gold co-moved. The scenario blend steps unevenly because the discount rate and the conversion factor move with each column. Every step is the difference between two recomputed grid prices of Figures 7 and 8. How to use it: start from the base-price values (NAV per share $3.71, blended fair value $6.59) and add or subtract the per-step figure for every step away from $60 and $4,000 — silver alone at $70 with gold at $4,000 gives NAV per share of about $4.51; for gold alone add $0.05 per $100/oz above $4,000. For a reading that also moves the rate and the conversion factor, use the scenario columns of Table 25.

P/NAV price map (unweighted). Figure 7’s 5% row at the producer’s five fixed P/NAV levels — the share price each implies at every grid price; no weight, no current-price column (the market-implied deck in §7.5 places $17.66).

Table 19. P/NAV price map — share price implied by each P/NAV level at each grid price ($/share)

Source: this analysis; each cell is the Figure 7 base-rate NAV per share at that column’s prices (1.64 / 2.68 / 3.71 / 4.75 / 5.78) × the row’s P/NAV. The levels are the fixed producer set, so two producers read column-for-column. First Majestic’s 0.81× target, derived in §7.3, reads $3.01 at the base prices, between the 0.75× and 1.00× levels. Parity at the base prices is $3.71; $17.66 sits above every cell of the map, 1.50× at $80 · $5,000 included ($8.67).

7.3 Relative valuation

At $17.66 and 492.9 m basic shares, the market capitalisation is $8,704.7 m and enterprise value $8,045.4 m (cash $1,093.3 m less the $405.3 m face of the two convertible notes, the revolver’s $0.3 m and $28.4 m of leases). Each target is the producer anchor moved by the Section 9 scorecard; no peer multiples enter. Forward means the next twelve months from 1 October 2026: 2027 is not guided, so the 2026 guidance midpoints of 8 July stand for the window. The $60 base sits 76% above silver’s five-year average of $34.15/oz and $4,000 gold 51% above its $2,645 (September 2021–August 2026, World Bank Pink Sheet), so the targets are held at mid-cycle in every scenario and only the decks move.

Table 20. 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, per the valuation guide linked in §7, “The valuation toolkit”. Dimensions 2, 4, 5 and 9 score at the norm (★★★) and carry no term; the SAT exposure is not a driver: the accrued year sits in the bridge and the open years in its sensitivity note. Jurisdiction is charged here, once, and not in the 5% rate. The line is printed once and reused for every multiple:

Target P/NAV = 1.00× anchor × (1 − 0.19) = 0.810× → 0.81× · Target EV/EBITDA = 7.0× anchor × 0.81 = 5.67× → 5.7× · Target FCF yield = 7.0% anchor ÷ 0.81 = 8.64% → 8.6% (a discount to value is a higher yield demanded). The rounded figures are the ones used in every table below.

Table 21. Forward EBITDA build — the next twelve months at the base prices

Source: this analysis; guidance per the Q2 2026 production and guidance release (p.5–6) and the Q2 2026 MD&A (p.13, p.27). Rows are numbered in the first column and run straight down the build. Volume ties to the mine guidance midpoints with nothing added. Revenue is built metal by metal at the base prices and each mine’s payable share, Wheaton’s ounces at the contract price; Royal Gold took no ounces in H1 2026 and none are assumed in the window. Cost basis: the guided cash cost already carries royalties, the environmental duty, smelting and selling costs; profit sharing and cash G&A are added from the AISC build. The NAV blocks use the full AISC, which adds sustaining capital, leases, share-based pay and accretion — the gap between the multiple’s and the model’s margins is that definition. For scale, H1 2026 adjusted EBITDA was $577.9 m at a realised $74.83/oz silver and $4,680/oz gold.

Table 22. Relative valuation — implied value per share (base case)

Source: this analysis; anchors per the valuation guide linked in §7, “The valuation toolkit” (producer: P/NAV 1.00×, EV/EBITDA 7.0×). The implied EV crosses every bridge line the NAV charges except corporate G&A, which EBITDA already carries, and deducts the $28.4 m of leases, whose payments EBITDA excludes. Values computed on unrounded inputs (3.007 → $3.01; 9.553 → $9.55).

The two reads sit $6.54 apart, with the multiple well above the NAV: a 5.7× multiple capitalises 2026 cash flow as if it lasted, while the NAV runs each mine only to the end of its reserve at reserve grade — 3.7 years at San Dimas and 4.8 at Santa Elena.

7.4 FCF-yield support

The third weighted read capitalises next-twelve-month free cash flow before growth capital at the producer yield anchor moved by the same driver line.

Table 23. FCF-yield support build — the next twelve months at the base prices

Source: this analysis; guidance per the Q2 2026 MD&A (p.13); D&A per the Q2 2026 financial statements (p.4; Note 5, p.17). Rows run straight down the build, the memo rows continuing the count. Cash tax is the statutory basis on EBITDA less sustaining capital and H1 2026 D&A annualised — the 2026 fiscal year the EBITDA is built on; the company gives no D&A or tax guidance for 2026. Exploration ($41–45 m) and the Jerritt Canyon restart sit inside the expansionary capital, so capitalised exploration is inside free cash flow after all capital. Growth capital is excluded from the valued figure by construction — Jerritt Canyon’s value is what the NAV leg carries.

The read lands at $11.12, $4.53 above the blend and nearly four times the NAV leg — the widest of the three, because a yield capitalises one year’s cash flow in perpetuity on a reserve base that runs four to nine years.

7.5 Cross-checks

Table 24. Cross-checks — reported, reconciled, never weighted

Source: this analysis; the implied deck solved on the Tables 15–23 model; metal monthly averages, their five-year highs and lows and the correlation per the World Bank Pink Sheet (release of 2 September 2026); EV/EBITDA history rebuilt from the audited statements for FY2022 (with its 2021 comparatives), FY2023 , FY2024 and FY2025 (statements of financial position, earnings and changes in equity) and the Q2 2026 statements (p.4, p.7), at the year-end NYSE closes of $11.11 (31 Dec 2021), $8.34 (30 Dec 2022), $6.15 (29 Dec 2023), $5.49 (31 Dec 2024) and $16.66 (31 Dec 2025) per Yahoo Finance’s daily history ; reserves per the 2024 (p.25) and 2025 (p.22, p.24) AIFs and production per the FY2025 MD&A (p.4); deals per the Pan American–MAG release (11 May 2025; MAG’s cash not deducted, gold not counted), the Coeur–SilverCrest release (4 October 2024; $122 m treasury deducted) and Coeur’s year-end 2024 reserves (Las Chispas 33.5 Moz silver, 357 koz gold, gold at the $4,000 : $60 base ratio); forecast deck per the World Bank Commodity Markets Outlook, April 2026 (p.21).

7.6 Scenarios & fair value

Every weighted method is re-run in every column, gold moving one step of its own grid with each step of silver. The rate steps out to 7% and 9% on the downside and holds at 5% on the upside; the conversion factor moves inside its band; the targets are held in every column. The memo row also holds the rate and the factor, so it is the linear version of Table 18. The downside columns are the Section 6 metal-price risk: silver back toward $40 and gold toward $3,000.

Table 25. Scenarios & fair value — inputs, value per method and the blend by grid price ($/share)

Source: this analysis; weights per §7.1 (the producer default); scenario names by distance from the base price. Base blend on a calculator: 0.50 × 3.007 + 0.30 × 9.553 + 0.20 × 11.121 = 1.503 + 2.866 + 2.224 = 6.593 → $6.59. Inputs behind the rows, by column: hedge mark $0.1 m in every column (FX forwards; no metal book); resource factor 0.25× / 0.25× / 0.25× / 0.30× / 0.35×; capitalised corporate cost $313.3 m / $340.3 m / $370.9 m / $370.9 m / $370.9 m; San Martín receivable $56.6 m / $61.0 m / $65.8 m / $65.8 m / $65.8 m; the targets 0.81× · 5.7× · 8.6% in every column; forward EBITDA $358.2 m / $554.0 m / $749.7 m / $945.4 m / $1,141.1 m; FCF before growth $228.9 m / $354.3 m / $479.7 m / $605.0 m / $730.4 m. The FCF-per-share row re-runs Table 23’s bridge at each column’s prices, cash tax recomputed and the $265.0 m of growth capital held. Adding the 0.26% dividend yield, the implied total return at the base is about −62.4% — reported, not rated. Illustrative scenarios, not forecasts.

Figure 9. Value per share by method and scenario

		Scenario (silver deck, gold co-moved)
		Deep Bear$40 · Au 3,000	Bear$50 · Au 3,500	Base$60 · Au 4,000	Bull$70 · Au 4,500	Deep Bull$80 · Au 5,000
Method	SOTP NAV × 0.81 (50%)	$1.31(−57%)	$2.11(−30%)	$3.01(base)	$3.94(+31%)	$4.92(+64%)
	EV/EBITDA 5.7× (30%)	$5.09(−47%)	$7.32(−23%)	$9.55(base)	$11.78(+23%)	$14.00(+47%)
	FCF-yield 8.6% (20%)	$5.31(−52%)	$8.21(−26%)	$11.12(base)	$14.03(+26%)	$16.93(+52%)
	Blended fair value	$3.24(−51%)	$4.89(−26%)	$6.59(base)	$8.31(+26%)	$10.05(+52%)

Source: this analysis; each cell recomputed at its column’s decks, rate and conversion factor (Table 25); shading ranked 0–9 across the whole grid. Current share price $17.66 (1 Oct 2026); market-implied deck ~$126/oz silver with gold at ~$7,318. 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 $6.59, inside a $3.24 (Deep Bear, $40 · $3,000) – $10.05 (Deep Bull, $80 · $5,000) range, against a $17.66 price — an implied −62.7%, Overvalued (wide band), the qualifier earned because the Deep Bear blend sits 82% below the price. Free cash flow after all capital for the next twelve months is $214.7 m, a 2.5% yield on the $8,704.7 m market capitalisation (5.5% before growth capital). Rating-flip prices: up into Modestly overvalued above ~$95/oz silver with gold at ~$5,729/oz (+57.6% from the base price); the read is already the lowest band, so there is no price below. The finding that leads is the market-implied silver deck of ~$126/oz with gold at ~$7,318 — above the five-year highs of $92.10 and $5,020 — so the price rests on more than the metal: on reserve lives far longer than the 3.7–8.9 years the filings support. The three methods disagree by more than 40%, and the spread is the analysis rather than noise: the NAV ($3.01 at 0.81×) counts only the ounces the reserves hold, at reserve grade, and charges the SAT only where a liability is recognised — the open years would take a further $0.92 off NAV per share at expected value; the EV/EBITDA leg ($9.55) and the FCF-yield leg ($11.12) capitalise 2026 cash flow as if the mines ran indefinitely. The NAV anchors the blend because the archetype puts it there, and it is the one leg that charges what the reserves cannot pay for. The assumption that drives the downside is silver: a return to $40 with gold at $3,000 takes the blend to $3.24. The producing tier of $2.83 says the market pays about $14.83 a share above what the mines and the bridge are worth on their reserves — for conversion of the 44 Moz of silver and 0.54 Moz of gold outside the plans, Jerritt Canyon’s restart and the inferred ounces.

Table 26. Assumptions box

Source: this analysis. Values per share to two decimals and multiples to two significant figures, computed on unrounded inputs and rounded half-up.

8. Near-term catalysts (1–3 years)

Table 27. Near-term catalysts

Source: the Q2 2026 MD&A (Los Gatos, Santa Elena, the SAT timetable), the 8 July 2026 guidance release , the San Martín sale release , the Jerritt Canyon restart release and the 2025 Annual Information Form (Navidad resource). Timings are company guidance, not commitments.

The two that matter most are the Jerritt Canyon study, which would turn a resource into a mine plan outside Mexico, and the reserve update, which tests whether drilling replaces what the mills consume.

9. Rating & verdict

First Majestic is scored on the nine dimensions every analysis on this blog uses, against the Section 2.10 peer set, with the producer weighting — 15% each for asset quality, cost, reserves, balance sheet and capital allocation, 6.25% for the other four. None is not-applicable.

Table 28. Scorecard rationale

Source: each row cites its evidence in this analysis; peer figures are those of Table 5, from each company’s own 2025 filings.

Weighted average: (0.15 × 2) + (0.15 × 3) + (0.15 × 2) + (0.15 × 3) + (0.15 × 2) + (0.0625 × 3) + (0.0625 × 2) + (0.0625 × 2) + (0.0625 × 3) = 0.30 + 0.45 + 0.30 + 0.45 + 0.30 + 0.1875 + 0.125 + 0.125 + 0.1875 = 2.43/5 → ★★½, Average (2.425 before rounding).

The two-axis verdict. Quality ★★½ (Average, 2.4/5); value read Overvalued (wide band) as of 1 October 2026, implied −62.7% from $17.66 (501.6 m fully diluted shares) to a $6.59 blended fair value; verdict: Full — the market already sees it. The shares price about $126/oz silver with gold at ~$7,318 against this analysis’s $60 and $4,000 base deck — above both metals’ five-year highs. The target multiples sit 19% below their archetype anchors — P/NAV 0.81×, EV/EBITDA 5.7×, an FCF yield of 8.6% — because asset scale (Dim 1), reserve life (Dim 3), capital allocation (Dim 6), governance (Dim 7) and Mexico (Dim 8) each carry a discount and no dimension earns a premium.

The bull case is cash and torque: an unhedged silver producer with $1.09 bn of cash, a low-cost Los Gatos and a gold restart in Nevada. The bear case is what the price assumes: reserves that run out within six years at three of four mines, a $1.28 bn tax claim in a jurisdiction that has already ruled once against it, and a share count that has nearly doubled. What tips it is the silver price — the read moves up to Modestly overvalued only above about $95/oz with gold near $5,729 — and, over three years, whether conversion keeps the mines’ lives ahead of the mills.

To rank First Majestic against every listed silver producer on the same nine dimensions — reserves, AISC, reserve life and P/NAV — screen the sector on Metal Pilot.

10. Sources, methodology & disclaimer

10.1 Sources, methodology & data vintage

Company filings. The 2025 Annual Information Form (dated 30 March 2026; reserves and resources, mine descriptions, stream and joint-venture terms, risk factors), the FY2025 audited financial statements and MD&A , the FY2024 MD&A , the 2023 and 2022 financial statements, the Q2 2026 financial statements and MD&A , the 8 July 2026 production and guidance release , the Jerritt Canyon restart release , the San Martín sale release , the 2026 management information circular , and the 2025 Sustainability Report . Technical reports: San Dimas and La Encantada (NI 43-101, effective 31 August 2025), Santa Elena (NI 43-101, effective 30 June 2021) and Los Gatos (S-K 1300, effective 1 July 2024). Market and peers: stockanalysis.com for the 1 October 2026 close; the World Bank Pink Sheet for metal prices; peer figures per Table 5.

Methodology. The data-as-of date is 1 October 2026: market data is the NYSE close that day ($17.66; 492.9 m basic, 501.6 m fully diluted shares); the balance sheet is 30 June 2026; reserves and resources are effective 31 December 2025; production is FY2025 and H1 2026, with guidance as updated on 8 July 2026. First Majestic reports in US dollars under IFRS. The valuation’s base deck is $60/oz silver and $4,000/oz gold, the representative trailing averages snapped to the fixed $40–80/oz silver and $3,000–5,000/oz gold grids, every grid price run as a scenario. Peers are the listed silver producers above 15 Moz a year; the scorecard uses the producer weighting. Figures not drawn: the asset map (a map has no inline figure format on this blog; Table 2 carries its read) and the five-year financial chart (a single series would only repeat Table 6). Data gaps to close at the next run: the Los Gatos NI 43-101 technical report effective 25 August 2026 (filed on SEDAR+ only, not in the source set — the AIF’s reserves stand in, which the 25 August 2026 filing release says are unchanged), and the Q3 2026 financial statements (site provisions). Update cadence: refreshed on each annual report and on material events — next, the Jerritt Canyon pre-feasibility study and the FY2026 results.

Re-run log. 2 October 2026 — re-run on the current template from the 11 August 2026 analysis: as-of date moved to 1 October 2026 and the source set to the Q2 2026 filings; the valuation rebuilt on a reproducible model, the accrued SAT liability in the bridge and the open reassessments priced as a sensitivity; composite re-scored from 2.9 to 2.4 against the Fresnillo, Pan American, Coeur and Hecla peer set; value read unchanged at Overvalued (wide band), now implied −62.7% to a $6.59 blended fair value.

Provenance: First Majestic Silver Corp. — Annual Information Form — 2025.

Table 29. Full source register — every figure §7 takes from a filing or a market series

Source: the filings and market series named in each row — the 2025 Annual Information Form , the 2024 Annual Information Form , the FY2025 financial statements and MD&A , the Q1 2026 MD&A , the Q2 2026 MD&A and financial statements , the Q2 2026 production and guidance release , the San Martín sale release , the Jerritt Canyon restart release , the La Encantada technical report , the World Bank Pink Sheet and Commodity Markets Outlook, April 2026 , and stockanalysis.com ; page numbers are those of each filed document as rendered on EDGAR, the AIF’s its printed page numbers.

10.2 Disclaimer & disclosure

This analysis is for informational purposes only and is not investment advice, a recommendation, or an offer to buy or sell any security. It is a point-in-time snapshot as of 1 October 2026: the share price, market capitalisation, enterprise value, multiples and valuation read all move, and silver-mining equities are especially volatile. Reserve, resource, study and forecast figures are estimates, prepared on the codes and bases stated beside each table. This report was prepared with AI assistance; figures were sourced from primary filings and reviewed, but readers should verify every number against the original documents before acting on it. The author holds no position in First Majestic Silver Corp. or in any company named here. Please do your own research and consult a licensed financial adviser.