Osisko Metals Inc.

OM · TSX OMZNF · OTC

osiskometals

$832.8M

USD

Market cap · 2026–07 · week 29

🇨🇦 Canada, Montreal

Country

Base Metals

Sector

Developer · Junior / Minor · Copper · Canada

Last updated 21 June 2026

Data compiled from public filings — information only, not investment advice. AI‑assisted; see methodology.

Overview: Osisko Metals Incorporated is a development-stage base-metals company headquartered in Montréal, Québec, Canada, operating primarily in Canada. The company's portfolio consists of 2 principal development projects, comprising the wholly owned Gaspé Copper Project in Québec and an approximately 52% joint-venture interest in the Pine Point zinc-lead project in the Northwest Territories. Key assets include the Copper Mountain deposit at Gaspé Copper and the past-producing Pine Point mining camp near Hay River. The business model is that of an advanced mineral-resource developer advancing two large, brownfield base-metals projects toward feasibility and potential construction rather than generating production revenue. Gaspé Copper is a copper-molybdenum-silver porphyry-skarn system supported by a NI 43-101 mineral resource estimate and an active large-scale drilling program aimed at resource conversion and expansion, with participation from the Government of Québec to maximize regional socio-economic benefits. Pine Point is a historic zinc-lead district held through a joint venture with an Appian-advised fund, leveraging existing infrastructure and a community partnership with the Town of Hay River. The principal model-linked risks are the company's pre-revenue status and dependence on equity financing, the absence of mineral reserves at either project, copper and zinc price volatility, and permitting and development execution risk on large, capital-intensive projects.

Strategy: Strategic direction is focused on de-risking and advancing two flagship base-metals projects. At Gaspé Copper, a core objective is to grow and upgrade the mineral resource: a 2025 drill program of 110,000 metres was designed to convert inferred resources into the indicated and measured categories, test expansion deeper below the E Zone horizon and southward toward Needle Mountain, characterize higher-grade skarn zones grading 0.5%-3.0% copper, and validate new geological models, building on a resource that grew materially through successive 2024 estimates. The enterprise is consolidating its land position, having acquired 199 adjacent claims in December 2024, and is advancing the project with the Government of Québec's participation in regional socio-economic planning. At Pine Point, strategy centers on advancing the joint venture with Appian under the governing investment and joint-venture agreements while building community alignment, evidenced by the November 2024 Memorandum of Understanding with the Town of Hay River. Capital allocation depends on continued access to equity financing, demonstrated by a December 2024 bought-deal private placement of flow-through and other units raising approximately $107.4 million to fund exploration and development.

Management: Executive leadership is headed by Chief Executive Officer and Director Robert Wares, a co-founder of the Osisko group who has served as a director since 2007, as Chairman since May 2017 and as Chief Executive Officer since January 2020. The board is led by Executive Chairman and Director John Burzynski, formerly Chief Executive Officer of Osisko Mining Inc. from 2015 to 2024. Financial leadership is provided by Chief Financial Officer Blair Zaritsky, previously Chief Financial Officer of Osisko Mining Inc., while Donald Njegovan serves as President, having been Chief Operating Officer of Osisko Mining Inc., and Jeff Hussey serves as Chief Operating Officer and as Chief Executive Officer of Pine Point Mining Limited. Ann Lamontagne serves as Vice President, Environment and Sustainable Development, and Alexandria Marcotte as Vice President, Exploration.

Sustainability: Environmental and sustainability oversight is led at the executive level by Vice President, Environment and Sustainable Development Ann Lamontagne, appointed in February 2024. At the Pine Point Project, Pine Point Mining Limited and the Town of Hay River signed a November 2024 Memorandum of Understanding setting out their intention to work together to pursue long-term sustainable growth through the development and operation of the project. At the Gaspé Copper Project, the Government of Québec is leading a committee that seeks to maximize socio-economic benefits in the Gaspé Peninsula region through collaboration with the local business community throughout the development process.

Structure: The company was incorporated under the Business Corporations Act (Alberta) on May 10, 2000 under the name Peterborough Capital Corp., was continued to British Columbia and, effective June 13, 2025, continued to Ontario, and uplisted to the Toronto Stock Exchange effective August 22, 2025 under the symbol OM. The Pine Point Project is held through Pine Point Mining Limited (PPML), a joint venture with a subsidiary of Appian Natural Resources Fund III LP advised by Appian Capital Advisory LLP; under a February 21, 2023 Investment Agreement (amended February 21, 2024) Appian agreed to acquire up to a 65% interest in PPML by funding expenditures, with the joint venture further governed by an April 6, 2024 Joint Venture Agreement, leaving Osisko Metals with approximately 52% equity. In December 2024 the company acquired 199 claims adjacent to Gaspé Copper from two private holders in exchange for 5,000,000 common shares and a 2% net smelter return royalty, half of which is redeemable for $2,000,000. The company funded its programs through a December 2024 bought-deal private placement of flow-through and HD units that raised approximately $107.4 million, with each unit including one-half of a warrant exercisable until December 11, 2026 at $0.35 per share.

Hedge: As a pre-revenue developer with no production, the company maintains no commodity hedge book and is exposed to fluctuations in copper, molybdenum, silver, zinc and lead prices, which directly affect the economic prospects of its projects. It is also subject to foreign-exchange risk between the Canadian dollar and U.S. dollar, given that commodity prices are denominated in U.S. dollars while its costs are largely incurred in Canadian dollars; mineral resource pit optimization at Gaspé Copper assumed a CAD:USD exchange rate of 1.33 alongside long-term prices of US$4.00 per pound copper, US$20.00 per pound molybdenum and US$24.00 per ounce silver.

Source: Osisko Metals Incorporated - Annual Information Form - 2025

Development · 2 projects

Gaspé Copper Project

Asset · Pre-feasibility

Canada, Québec

Open project page

Mining

Type

Development

Status

🇨🇦 Canada, Québec

Country

Project information

As at 4 November 2024

Aggregation level: Asset

Report standard: Ni 43 101

Ownership %: 100

Operator: Yes

Extraction: Open Pit

Ore type: Sulphide

Processing route: Grinding and flotation, or CIL

Description

As at 4 November 2024

The Corporation's 100%-owned flagship copper development project on the Gaspé Peninsula of Québec, centered on the Copper Mountain porphyry-skarn deposit (with the Porphyry Mountain and Needle Mountain targets) hosting copper, molybdenum and silver mineralization. A current NI 43-101 technical report (effective November 4, 2024, filed January 2, 2025) reports pit-constrained mineral resources at a 0.12% Cu cut-off; resources are not reserves and lack demonstrated economic viability. The Government of Québec is participating through a committee to maximize regional socio-economic benefits. A 2025 drill program of 110,000 metres was designed to convert inferred resources to indicated/measured, test depth and southern (Needle Mountain) expansion, characterize higher-grade skarn zones and validate geological models, returning numerous wide intercepts including 1,117.5 m averaging 0.25% Cu. In December 2024 the Corporation acquired 199 adjacent claims for 5,000,000 shares and a 2% NSR royalty (half redeemable for $2,000,000). MRE pit optimization used US$4.00/lb copper, US$20.00/lb molybdenum, US$24.00/oz silver and a CAD:USD rate of 1.33.

Mining metrics

As at 4 November 2024 · exclusive

Premium access required

This content is available on a paid plan.

Upgrade to Premium to unlock this content.

Reserves & resources — detail

As at 4 November 2024

Premium access required

This content is available on a paid plan.

Upgrade to Premium to unlock this content.

Pine Point Project

Asset · Pre-feasibility · Ownership 52%

Canada, Northwest Territories

Open project page

Mining

Type

Development

Status

🇨🇦 Canada, Northwest Territories

Country

Project information

As at 31 May 2024

Aggregation level: Asset

Report standard: Ni 43 101

Ownership %: 52

Operator: Yes

Extraction: Open Pit

Description

As at 31 May 2024

Past-producing zinc-lead mining camp near Hay River, Northwest Territories, held through Pine Point Mining Limited (PPML), a joint venture in which Osisko Metals holds approximately 52% equity and a subsidiary of Appian Natural Resources Fund III LP holds the balance; the JV is governed by a February 21, 2023 Investment Agreement (under which Appian may acquire up to 65% of PPML by funding expenditures) and an April 6, 2024 Joint Venture Agreement. PPML owns a 100% interest in the Pine Point Project, which is supported by a NI 43-101 mineral resource estimate update (Pine Point Zinc-Lead Project Mineral Resource Estimate Update, Hay River, Northwest Territories) effective May 31, 2024; the detailed resource tabulation is contained in that technical report. In November 2024 PPML and the Town of Hay River signed a Memorandum of Understanding to pursue long-term sustainable growth through development and operation of the project.

Mining metrics

Premium access required

This content is available on a paid plan.

Upgrade to Premium to unlock this content.

Assumptions

The projects listed here reflect the information captured in this workspace and are not necessarily a complete picture of the company's portfolio. For authoritative figures, refer to the company's official filings.

Premium access required

This content is available on a paid plan.

Upgrade to Premium to unlock this content.

Create an account

How to read this tab

The tables below list unit codes most often used in the Base Metals sector for this company. MetalPilot stores contained metal or product in the codes below; grade and tonnage use separate fields. In side-by-side comparison views (stock page Portfolio tab, watchlist By sector), heterogeneous source units are converted to each commodity's preferred display unit (for example Moz Au, kt Cu, MMbbl oil) before summing; the same canonical codes appear in project data.

What the Portfolio tab shows

The Portfolio tab presents a project-level view of the company's reported assets, built from publicly disclosed information (technical reports, annual filings, MD&A, investor presentations, MRMR / R&R statements, NI 43-101 / NI 51-101 / SEC S-K 1300 / SEC S-K 1200 / JORC / SAMREC / PERC / PRMS / COGEH filings, and similar primary sources).
Figures are grouped by project type (mining, oil & gas, royalty, stream, processing facility, development, portfolio aggregate) and are shown alongside the headline reserve base, headline production, headline grade / quality, cost benchmarks, estimated lifetime, commercial terms (for royalties / streams), operational capacity (for processing) and a single-figure rating where the underlying data supports one.
Each data table on the Portfolio tab is followed by ONE Assumptions footnote describing the modelling choices for that table; KPI stat-card assumptions appear in the bottom block instead. All legal and section disclaimers are merged into a single disclaimer list at the bottom of the Portfolio tab.

Concepts in your sector — Base metals

Cu % / Zn % are the grade norm for base metals; kg/t is for very high-grade deposits. Porphyry copper is typically 0.3–1% Cu; SEDEX zinc 5–15% Zn.
C1 vs C2 vs C3 vs AISC. C1 is direct mining + processing + transport + by-product credits. C2 adds depreciation; C3 adds corporate/indirect costs. Compare like for like.
TC/RCs (treatment & refining charges) are smelter payments per dry metric tonne of concentrate — a non-trivial part of base-metal economics, not shown on the Portfolio tab.
Concentrate vs metal. Miners often sell concentrate (~25–30% Cu) and are paid for contained metal minus TC/RCs. Portfolio books contained metal on a 100% basis.

Portfolio tab — table guide

Portfolio KPIs — company-level headline numbers aggregated from the featured projects (project counts, attributable annual production by commodity, attributable resource base by commodity, last filing date, operator share). USD value lines multiply attributable volumes by the resolved snapshot price.
Portfolio snapshot — one-screen summary of the portfolio: counts by type and status, country mix, reporting standards used, operator share, primary commodity, attributable annual production summary and attributable resource base summary.
Mining — one row per mining project, with columns for project name, location, status, primary commodities, production (with rating), reserves & resources (with rating), grade (with rating), costs and estimated lifetime. Multi-commodity projects emit one summary row per commodity.
Royalty — one row per royalty interest held by the company. Columns cover the underlying project, operator, commodity, commercial terms (rate, type, cap, area-of-interest), attributable production, attributable reserves and estimated lifetime.
Stream — one row per metal stream held by the company. Each row shows the underlying project, the streamed commodity, the headline stream percentage, the ongoing per-ounce / per-tonne payment, and attributable production / reserves.
Processing facilities — one row per midstream / processing facility (pipeline, fractionator, LNG train, storage cavern, refinery, smelter, mill, heap-leach pad, CPP, etc.). Columns include nameplate capacity, contracted capacity, feedstock commodities and operational footprint.
Development — projects in development status or in a pre-production lifecycle phase. The production column is re-labelled 'Targeted production (rating)' to highlight that the figures are plans, not actuals.
Portfolio Aggregate — a single company-level row used when the company itself publishes a portfolio rollup (e.g. company-wide 2P barrels across all properties).
Reserves & resources — detail — a leaf-category pivot showing every reserve and resource category disclosed across the projects.
NPV (grouped) — all NPV rows captured from the filings, grouped by commodity, resource category, development status and pricing case. Each NPV figure is shown with its discount rate, basis (before-tax / after-tax), currency and value scale.

Ownership / Working interest

Ownership percentage means the company's working-interest share of the asset: its slice of the project before royalties and before government take. It is shown on a 0–100 scale.
Mines, oil and gas fields, and processing facilities — this is how much of the asset belongs to the company under that working-interest idea. One hundred percent is fully owned; a lower number usually means partners share the rest.
Royalties and streaming agreements — the percentage is often not the story; what matters economically is usually the royalty or stream rate, shown elsewhere alongside these figures.
Oil and gas — read this as gross working interest only. Do not treat it as net production or net wells after royalties; when filings distinguish gross from net, that shows up in how the resource numbers themselves are labelled.
Below 100% — the short summary for each project names other owners and their stakes when the source says who they are.
NRI vs WI (O&G). Working interest (WI) is the obligation to pay a share of costs; net revenue interest (NRI) is the share of revenue after royalties and overriding-royalty interests. A 100% WI well rarely produces 100% NRI; typical onshore U.S. NRI is 75–87.5% of WI depending on the lease royalty.
Operator vs non-operator. The operator runs day-to-day operations; non-operating partners pay their WI share of costs but do not run the asset. Some Portfolio rows show operator share where disclosed.

Units, conversions & reporting standards

Unit codes, conversion cheat sheets, cost benchmarks (AISC, C1–C3), reporting standards (NI 43-101, JORC, SEC S-K 1300) and resource/reserve category definitions live in the full terminology & units reference.

Each table lists the numeric band for scores 1–5 (production and resource base; grade where applicable for mining commodities) using the same thresholds as project rating stat cards. Only commodities that appear on featured projects for this document are listed.

Silver

Score

Production

Resource base

Grade

1 / 5

0–1 Moz Ag

0–25 Moz Ag

0–50 g/t Ag

2 / 5

1–3 Moz Ag

25–75 Moz Ag

50–100 g/t Ag

3 / 5

3–7 Moz Ag

75–150 Moz Ag

100–200 g/t Ag

4 / 5

7–12 Moz Ag

150–225 Moz Ag

200–300 g/t Ag

5 / 5

≥ 12 Moz Ag

≥ 225 Moz Ag

≥ 300 g/t Ag

Copper

Score

Production

Resource base

Grade

1 / 5

0–50 kt Cu

0–500 kt Cu

0–0.5 % Cu

2 / 5

50–125 kt Cu

500–2000 kt Cu

0.5–1 % Cu

3 / 5

125–250 kt Cu

2000–5000 kt Cu

1–1.5 % Cu

4 / 5

250–500 kt Cu

5000–10000 kt Cu

1.5–2 % Cu

5 / 5

≥ 500 kt Cu

≥ 10000 kt Cu

≥ 2 % Cu

Molybdenum

Score

Production

Resource base

Grade

1 / 5

0–5 Mlb Mo

0–50 Mlb Mo

0–0.03 % Mo

2 / 5

5–15 Mlb Mo

50–200 Mlb Mo

0.03–0.06 % Mo

3 / 5

15–30 Mlb Mo

200–500 Mlb Mo

0.06–0.12 % Mo

4 / 5

30–50 Mlb Mo

500–1000 Mlb Mo

0.12–0.2 % Mo

5 / 5

≥ 50 Mlb Mo

≥ 1000 Mlb Mo

≥ 0.2 % Mo

Copper uses kt Cu bands (Mlb Cu when lb-scale copper resources appear on featured projects). Lithium grade uses hard-rock % Li₂O bands unless brine-style extraction or brine units appear on featured projects.

Assumptions

Presented values are denominated in currency of the country where the company is headquartered. Values like market capitalization might differ from the values visible in other parts of the page, where the currency is always USD.