TMC the metals (TMC): Rethinking Valuation After U.S. Critical Minerals Push and Deep-Sea Mining Momentum

Simply Wall St · 2d ago

Renewed U.S. efforts to lock in critical minerals for AI and semiconductors have put TMC the metals (TMC) back in the spotlight, with investors leaning into its deep sea first mover positioning.

See our latest analysis for TMC the metals.

That policy backdrop has helped power a sharp re-rating, with TMC’s 30 day share price return of 26.50 percent feeding into a 532.50 percent year to date gain and a 786.16 percent one year total shareholder return, signaling momentum is clearly building despite recent profit taking and weak reported earnings.

If this kind of speculative upside has your attention, it is also worth exploring other high growth names where insiders are heavily invested by scanning fast growing stocks with high insider ownership.

With the stock now trading just below its analyst price target after a spectacular run, the key question for investors is whether TMC remains an underappreciated critical minerals play or whether the market is already pricing in blue sky growth.

Price to Book Ratio of -77.3x: Is it justified?

TMC's current valuation looks stretched against peers, with a deeply negative price to book ratio of -77.3x standing behind the recent share price surge.

The price to book ratio compares a company’s market value to its net assets and is often used for asset heavy, cyclically sensitive sectors like metals and mining. In TMC’s case, the metric is distorted because shareholders equity is negative, meaning liabilities exceed assets and any comparison to book value becomes more of a warning flag than a traditional valuation yardstick.

That imbalance raises questions about what investors are really paying for at $7.59 a share, particularly when the company currently generates no revenue, is unprofitable and has seen losses deepen over the past five years. With no meaningful revenue base and a balance sheet in negative territory, the market appears to be pricing in a highly optimistic future rather than present fundamentals.

Relative to the broader US Metals and Mining industry, where companies tend to trade around a low single digit price to book, TMC’s -77.3x multiple sits far outside normal ranges, underpinned by negative equity rather than premium profitability or asset quality. That disconnect highlights how speculative current pricing is compared with sector norms and places far more weight on expectations of future project execution than on conventional valuation support today.

See what the numbers say about this price — find out in our valuation breakdown.

Result: Price to book ratio of -77.3x (OVERVALUED)

However, several factors could quickly cool sentiment, including regulatory setbacks to deep sea mining or delays in turning exploration rights into commercially viable production.

Find out about the key risks to this TMC the metals narrative.

Build Your Own TMC the metals Narrative

If you have a different view or want to dig into the numbers yourself, you can build a tailored narrative in just minutes with Do it your way.

A great starting point for your TMC the metals research is our analysis highlighting 1 key reward and 5 important warning signs that could impact your investment decision.

Ready for more high conviction ideas?

Before you move on, consider scanning powerful stock shortlists that many investors overlook, so you are not late to potential opportunities.

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.