Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
BHP and Codan are not interchangeable investments: BHP’s results are strongly exposed to mined commodity prices, production and large-project execution, while Codan sells communications and metal-detection products into markets with different demand and order patterns. A useful comparison starts with those business risks, then examines like-for-like financial results, balance-sheet resilience, dividends and valuation. The latest figures available here cover different periods—BHP FY2025 and Codan FY2026—so they do not establish which share is the better buy.
Start with what each company sells
| Comparison point | BHP | Codan |
|---|---|---|
| Business | A diversified mining group with exposure to copper, iron ore, steelmaking coal and developing potash projects. | A technology company with communications and metal-detection businesses. Minelab metal detectors are one example of its products. |
| Key earnings influences | Commodity prices and sales volumes, mine performance, operating costs, and the timing and cost of major projects. | Product and systems demand, contract and order timing, product launches, and the company’s ability to execute and meet customer demand. |
| Typical risk to investigate | Commodity-cycle exposure and disruptions or overruns at operating assets and projects. | Changes in segment demand, order timing, and reliance on successful products and contracts. |
These differences affect how to interpret growth and profit. A stronger mining result may reflect commodity prices as well as output, while a technology company’s growth can be shaped by product demand, contract timing and segment execution. Neither company’s headline growth rate, by itself, reveals whether that performance is repeatable.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Keep reporting periods and measures comparable
BHP’s cited operating figures are for the financial year ended 30 June 2025. Codan’s headline results are for the financial year ended 30 June 2026. These are issuer-reported figures, not independent estimates or guarantees, and their growth rates cover different years and business models.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →| Measure | BHP FY2025 | Codan FY2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Period end | 30 June 2025 | 30 June 2026 |
| Reported production or revenue | Group copper production: 2.02 million tonnes, up 8% from FY2024. WAIO production: 257 million tonnes attributable, or 290 million tonnes on a 100% basis. | Revenue: A$875.0 million, up 30% year over year. |
| Profit measures in the cited summary | The cited operating figures do not provide a directly comparable Codan-style statutory profit figure. BHP also reports underlying, non-IFRS measures; check definitions and reconciliations in its reporting before comparing profits. | EBIT: A$244.1 million, up 67%. NPAT: A$175.2 million, up 69%. |
BHP’s production numbers are not revenue or profit, and Codan’s revenue and earnings are not directly comparable to tonnes produced. For a financial comparison, retrieve both companies’ underlying statements for the same or most recent available periods. Compare statutory profit with statutory profit, or clearly defined adjusted measures with the same type of adjusted measure; do not mix BHP non-IFRS underlying results with Codan statutory results without explaining the difference.
#1 Best Overall
Assess growth and the cost of delivering it
BHP: production, sustaining investment and project delivery
For a miner, ask whether production growth comes from existing operations, new capacity or acquisitions, and what sustaining and expansion capital is required. Project schedules and budgets matter because delayed production can defer expected cash flows while costs rise.
In its July 2025 operational review, BHP moved Jansen Stage 1 first production to mid-CY2027 and estimated capital expenditure at US$7.0–7.4 billion, compared with its original US$5.7 billion estimate. This is historical guidance, not confirmation of the current schedule or budget. Check BHP’s latest project disclosure before relying on it. In the same review, management described commodity-demand support from renewable-energy investment, grid build-out, machinery exports and electric-vehicle sales; that was commentary dated July 2025, not a current market forecast.
Codan: demand, products and execution
Codan’s FY2026 summary attributes growth to high demand for unmanned systems, new gold-detector products and a full-year contribution from Kägwerks. That is management’s explanation of its reported results, not independent proof that each factor will persist. To judge the growth outlook, examine the detailed results for segment contributions, customer and order trends, product launches, acquisition effects and capacity to fulfil demand.
Codan’s investor-centre announcements also list a 29 September 2026 H1 FY2027 trading update. Read the underlying update and annual report for current trading and financial detail rather than extrapolating the FY2026 headline growth rates.
Rank #3
Compare cash generation and resilience
Profitability does not show how much cash is available after operating needs and investment. For both companies, compare operating cash flow, capital expenditure, net debt, liquidity and cash conversion across several years, using consistent definitions and periods. Free cash flow is particularly useful alongside profit, but confirm how each figure is calculated.
- For BHP: consider how commodity-price changes affect earnings and cash generation, whether operating assets can sustain production, and how project spending or delays could affect returns.
- For Codan: consider how concentrated revenue and profit are across its segments, how order and contract timing affects cash conversion, and whether product demand and execution remain strong.
- For both: review debt maturities, available liquidity, capital commitments and the cash needed to maintain operations before treating a dividend or growth plan as secure.
Use the latest annual reports and interim disclosures to fill in those measures. The headline summaries cited here do not establish a like-for-like cash-flow, debt or return-on-capital comparison.
Evaluate dividends on their basis, not just the headline
Codan reported a FY2026 full-year dividend of 48.5 cents per share, fully franked, up 70% year over year. Franking represents Australian tax credits attached to eligible dividends; the value to an investor depends on individual tax circumstances. The reported increase describes one year and does not guarantee future distributions.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute2Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors3Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFor BHP and Codan, compare dividends with earnings and free cash flow over several years. BHP’s distributions can vary with the commodity cycle, while Codan’s franked dividend should be considered alongside its cash generation and capital needs. Do not compare dividend yields without a dated share price and a clearly stated dividend basis—such as trailing dividends or a declared forward amount.
Best Value
Do valuation work using prices from the same date
A company’s operating profile does not determine whether its shares are attractively priced. The available figures do not establish paired BHP and Codan share prices, market capitalisations, valuation multiples or dividend yields. Obtain current prices and shares outstanding from a reliable exchange or company source, record the date and currency, and calculate comparable measures from the relevant financial statements.
- Price-to-earnings: specify whether earnings are statutory or adjusted and whether the period is historical or forecast. Mining profits can move sharply with commodity prices, so one year’s P/E may give a distorted view of BHP’s through-cycle earnings.
- Enterprise value to EBITDA: use a consistent EBITDA definition and account for net debt so that capital structures are not ignored.
- Free-cash-flow yield: state the period and capex treatment. For BHP, consider how much cash flow depends on commodity conditions; for Codan, consider order timing and investment needs.
A lower multiple is not automatically a bargain: it may reflect lower expected growth, greater risk, cyclical peak earnings or other concerns. Valuation only becomes informative when matched to business quality, durability of cash flow and the risks a prospective investor can tolerate.
Quick Recap
A practical decision checklist
- Read current primary disclosures. Start with BHP’s latest annual and operational reports, and Codan’s latest annual report, results and trading updates. Confirm that the figures refer to comparable periods.
- Separate business drivers. For BHP, test assumptions about commodity prices, production and project costs. For Codan, examine segment demand, order timing, products and execution.
- Reconcile the financials. Compare revenue, operating profit, statutory earnings, cash flow, capex, debt and returns on capital using consistent definitions.
- Check distributions and price. Review dividend history and coverage, then use same-date market prices and a stated dividend basis for any yield or valuation calculation.
- Match risks to your situation. Decide whether you can accept commodity-cycle exposure and large-project risk, or product-demand and order-timing risk. The answer depends on valuation and personal circumstances, not the company labels alone.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
