Sharemaestro company report · Quality Compounders · TOR

DPM Metals Inc.

DPM · Business strength leads; value needs scrutiny

3 of 3 available weekly market readings are positive. Price conditions are supportive, but the factor profile still has a weak link.

The selected research question · Quality Compounders

Can business strength persist?

The screen favours profitability, resilience and growth. Look for repeated business-strength readings and cash support, while keeping valuation and price risk in view.

Business strength with staying power

Business strength leads; value needs scrutiny

3 of 4 measured focus pillars have standing of at least 65. Compare the weaker readings with their own history before treating the case as complete.

Latest change: 1 improving, 1 weakening and 2 unchanged across the 4 comparable focus pillars since the previous edition.

3/4 strong
Focus pillars with standing ≥65. This is a breadth check, not a new combined score.
Business strength
95/100

+3.0 points vs screen median

Strong in 100% of 17 observed editions
Growth
94/100

+1.5 points vs screen median

Strong in 76% of 17 observed editions
Value
16/100

-11.5 points vs screen median

Strong in 0% of 17 observed editions
Price strength
94/100

+22.0 points vs screen median

Strong in 100% of 17 observed editions

The comparison uses companies qualifying for this screen in the same universe and edition. Medians require at least five companies. Historical strength counts actual factor observations; it does not claim historical screen membership.

01 · The company in perspective

The shape of the evidence

Higher means stronger relative standing.
Value16/100
-29.0 points vs Basic Materials median
Business strength95/100
+44.0 points vs Basic Materials median
Price strength94/100
+41.0 points vs Basic Materials median
Growth94/100
+35.5 points vs Basic Materials median
Capital return20/100
-21.0 points vs Basic Materials median

Vertical marks show the peer median · 192 company records in the comparison.

Current research reading

Price ahead of value

Price leadership comes with a weaker value ranking.

Watch for slowing price strength or improvement in the company record.

Strongest pillar

Business strength

95/100 standing

Weakest pillar

Value

16/100 standing

The strongest and weakest pillars describe this profile, not changes in company performance. The history below shows whether the readings are improving.

Beneath the factor profile

How well does the business support the score?

Derived from the saved company inputs · 25 Sep 2026
Cash value49/100
Cash backing87/100
Business durability90/100
Financial resilience100/100
Capital discipline46/100
Price support70/100

These established Sharemaestro cash-research scores summarise cash backing, durability, resilience and capital discipline. Higher is stronger on the available tests. They are separate from universe ranks and are not percentiles or probabilities. Missing components remain unavailable.

02 · Market confirmation

Is the price supporting the case?

Full chart terminal ↗
Trend SignalPositivelatest completed chart observation
Market DynamicsPositivelatest completed chart observation
Relative StrengthPositivelatest completed chart observation
Price / Fair Value+149.2%positive is above the reference

03 · What is changing

A strong reading matters more when it lasts.

7 Jun 2026 – 25 Sep 2026
Factor standing, one edition at a time

Read across for persistence. Read down for breadth. Each cell is an actual published observation.

80–9965–7940–640–39No reading
Company factor history. Higher scores mean stronger standing in the comparison universe.
Factor7 Jun202614 Jun202621 Jun202628 Jun20265 Jul202612 Jul202619 Jul202626 Jul20262 Aug20269 Aug202616 Aug202623 Aug202630 Aug20264 Sep202611 Sep202618 Sep202625 Sep2026LatestChange
CombinedFocus62-2.0points
Business strengthFocus950.0points
GrowthFocus940.0points
ValueFocus16-2.0points
Price strengthFocus94+1.0points
Capital returnFurther context200.0points

Hover or focus a cell to inspect its dated reading. Arrow keys move between factors and editions. Scroll across for more dates.

Changes since the previous edition
Value-2.0 pts18 → 16
Price strength+1.0 pts93 → 94
Business strength0.0 pts95 → 95
Growth0.0 pts94 → 94
Capital return0.0 pts20 → 20

Changes compare 18 Sep 2026 with 25 Sep 2026. The underlying company period did not change between these editions. Prices, peer rankings and other inputs can still move the scores. Changes in a relative score do not, by themselves, identify a cause.

04 · Competitive position

Company strength, in its peer context

Explore Basic Materials ↗

Business strength and Growth

DPM is highlighted against companies in the Quality Compounders screen. Select a point to compare the same research angle. Up to 250 companies shown.

Has price kept pace?

Price returns to 25 Sep 2026. The comparison is the median of companies in the same sector with a reading, not a traded portfolio.

3 monthsDPM+37.5%Sector median12.7%Difference+24.8 pp
6 monthsDPM+39.4%Sector median6.6%Difference+32.8 pp
12 monthsDPM+110.0%Sector median27.7%Difference+82.2 pp

Relative standing is the useful comparison.

A rising share price can still trail its peers. A company with falling prices can still outperform a weaker sector. Compare the return gap with the factor profile before drawing a conclusion.

At least five sector observations are required to display a median. Returns exclude dividends. These are completed historical returns, not forward estimates.

05 · Staying power and price risk

Separate company standing from the ride.

Strong factor evidence does not remove price risk.
Business strength · strong editions100%score ≥65 in 17 observed editions
Annualised volatility53.9%stored one-year daily measure · factor date
Input coverage100%available factor inputs, not certainty

Drawdown measures the weekly close below its running high within the displayed price history. It starts at zero and is not an all-time drawdown. Persistence counts observed editions only; missing weeks are not filled in.

06 · Research playbook

What would strengthen — or weaken — this reading?

Conditions to monitor, not a trade instruction.
Build the Quality Compounders case

Business strength is sustained and growth broadens

Compare the business-strength history with cash backing and growth. Check whether price support is keeping pace without the value reading deteriorating.

3 of 3 available weekly market readings are positive. Price conditions are supportive, but the factor profile still has a weak link.

Challenge the case

Quality weakens while valuation remains demanding

Value is the weakest measured focus pillar at 16/100. Check whether it is recovering, stable or deteriorating in the history above.

A loss of screen qualification, lower coverage or deterioration across several readings would require a fresh review.

Compare the alternatives

Keep the research question consistent

Compare DPM with other companies selected by Quality Compounders. A stronger overall score does not necessarily mean stronger evidence for this particular approach.

Open this screen →

Screen membership

Where DPM qualifies

The same selection rules used by the Company Screener.

A traceable Sharemaestro report

Built from the record we have.

This report uses published Sharemaestro factor snapshots and stored completed weekly prices and indicators. Company inputs are translated into comparable standing, change and context. The page does not fetch live accounts or infer missing company results.

Scores use the established higher-is-stronger Sharemaestro display convention and are relative to Canada - CAD. Sector medians compare those same universe scores; they do not re-rank the company. Peer medians exclude missing readings.

The company period is the period end used in the factor edition, not its filing date. Stored history is an observation record, not a claim of a point-in-time investable backtest. None of these scores is a probability or expected return.

Historical price series may reflect provider adjustments. The combined score is a summary, not a substitute for the distinct strengths, weaknesses and data coverage shown above.

Evidence context