The silver (“Ag”) price seems to have bottomed in the mid-US$50’s per troy ounce in July, then bounced to $67/oz last week, and now sits at around $65.5/oz. High-quality Ag-heavy juniors have responded, but many remain 35%-60% below Jan-Feb highs, when Ag topped $121/oz.
Investors can look at today’s Ag price as the glass half empty or half full… For the 24-month period ended 12/31/24, Ag averaged $25.5/oz., 60% below the current level.
Yet, during that time projects were being advanced, PEA/PFS/BFS reports were delivered, drilling was ongoing. The market was fine with Ag in the mid-$20s, thinking it was headed for $40+/oz.
Surprisingly, some investors are upset with the mid-$60s, a level few dreamed of two years ago. I believe the glass is half full. Funding for good projects has improved, fundamentals for Ag remain strong, and there’s growing urgency to secure long-term sustainable supply from Western-friendly countries.
Two of the top four largest producing countries are China & Russia, what could probably go wrong? The world clearly needs more silver from S. & N. America. In my view, if one’s bullish on the medium-to-long-term outlook for Ag, several companies offer compelling buying opportunities.
Silver’s inflation-adjusted high dates back to January, 1980! In today’s dollars it’s ~$210/oz. Is $210 a crazy outlier? Note that the entire year of 1980, averaged ~$86.
What’s changed since 1980? Solar power was a novelty, now it’s globally ubiquitous. There were no EVs, AI/Data Centers, cell phones, laptops, the Internet, or high-tech (wireless) consumer electronics.
We’re in year six of a mined Ag deficit, new mines take well over a decade from discovery to commercial production, while truly massive solar farms are deployed in 1-2 years. Yes, I think Ag is headed back above $75/oz. If true, select companies could see meaningful rebounds.
Which juniors? Fully-funded ones with high-grade Ag-heavy projects in safe, prolific jurisdictions, near regional infrastructure, not highly remote areas like in parts of Australia, Canada, Russia, Mongolia, Brazil, Chile, or Alaska.
A company that checks a lot of investment boxes is Pacifica Silver (CSE: PSIL) / (OTCQB: PAGFF). It has an excellent team, and is fully-funded for 60,000+ meters of drilling over the net two seasons on a very promising project in mining-friendly, prolific, Durango, Mexico.
The focus is on its flagship 11,876 hectare Claudia property (a past-producer, with at least nine artisanal/small -scale mines), acquired in July, 2025. Importantly, the transaction was negotiated in 2nd qtr. 2025, when Ag was ~$33/oz., roughly half today’s level.
In 2025, Durango was ranked as Mexico’s 3rd safest state (out of 31) in the Mexican Peace Index. The annual ranking is conducted by an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank headquartered in Sydney, Australia.
According to CAMIMEX, Mexico’s main private mining industry association, there are 59 mines and/or active projects in Durango State.
Claudia hosts previously identified mineralized zones, including the Aguilareña, Guadalupana, Tres Reyes, La Concepción, Santiaguera, Mina de Oro, Mina Vieja, El Grullo, Noche Buena, Don José, El Cristo, and Lizeth vein exposures.
As mentioned, Pacifica Silver has a strong team, especially for a fully-diluted enterprise value of just ~C$78M. The Company had a robust C$27M in cash on 3/31/26. Please see bios above/below… In addition to Founder/CEO Todd Anthony, please review the impressive credentials of Chairman Kunz, VP Exploration Redak, Advisors Dr. Valedor & Weiss.
Note, CEO Anthony has been actively buying shares in the open market for the past two years. He owns 3.0 million. Historical work on the Aguilareña vein included a 90-meter-deep shaft and three development levels, with the most extensive extending ~770 m along strike.
Prior to Pacifica’s involvement from mid-2025, drilling had tested < 10% of the mapped 30 km of strike length. Surface mapping/trenching by previous operators, and numerous small-scale historical mine workings, indicate strong potential for new high-grade discoveries.
The Claudia project is located in the Sierra Madre Occidental –> one of the world’s most prolific epithermal precious metal belts, with major mines/projects and robust infrastructure nearby.
Mined for over 500 years, the belt has produced billions of ounces Ag, plus millions of ounces Au. Major companies currently active across the belt include Newmont, Fresnillo, Agnico Eagle, Pan American Silver, and First Majestic Silver.
Following meaningful success in Phase I drilling last year, a 20,000 meter Phase II program well underway. The Project benefits from low-cost and year-round drilling. More on drill results later.
I believe Pacifica is undervalued largely due to it only having an historical resource, not a current NI 43-101 compliant one. Below is the historical resource, including “potential mineralization” as identified by a third party.
As a frame of reference, not to be relied upon as it’s non NI 43-101 compliant, at $64/$4,400 Ag/Au, the potential mineralization estimate would be the main driver of a mineral resource of 183M Ag Eq. ounces, with an Ag Eq. grade of ~450 g/t.
Note, potential mineralization is derived from “40% of vein material over a projected 300-350 meters of vertical depth.” Even if this third-party estimate proves overly aggressive, upwards of 90,000 meters of drilling will have been done by 2H/27, which should support a sizable Ag Eq. resource.
In my view, an upcoming compliant resource estimate could show tens of millions of Ag Eq. ounces, perhaps ~60M, given the number of meters that will be drilled, with more ounces to follow in subsequent estimates. However, herein lies a primary risk… How many ounces can be booked, how quickly, and at what cost?
Even if there’s north of 100M Ag Eq. ozs, which I believe is a reasonable goal, if it takes 3+ years to get there, then today’s valuation might not be especially compelling. I’m hoping to see 100M+ Ag Eq. troy ounces after next year’s fully-funded drilling. Note, we might not see that until late-2027 or early-2028.
Peer high-grade Ag-heavy juniors, albeit mostly at more advanced stages (PEA, PFS, BFS), are valued in the C$4 to C$10/Ag Eq. oz. range. And, pre-PEA junior, newly listed, Sinda ltd., is valued at ~C$8.8/oz. in the ground. Sinda is notable as it also is a Mexican Ag junior.
In support of an attractive, growing resource, drill results have been robust since 2025, including the following; 754 g/t Ag Eq. over 4.4 meters, (incl. 2.0 m of 1,613 g/t Ag Eq.), and 987 Ag Eq. over 2.5 m. That’s very high grade over decent widths (not merely sub-1 meter hits).
I really like that some of the best drill results ever at Claudia are the most recent. And, note how shallow those two intervals from July are, from 66 & 100 meters, respectively.
Make no mistake, given the early stage, Pacifica Silver is riskier than many peers, but high-grade helps a lot, and a strong, experienced, well-connected team is comforting.
Therefore, I argue that investors are being well rewarded for the incremental risk of being pre-maiden resource, (but hosting past production, an historical resource + a potential mineralization estimate).
Assuming the Claudia project can book 60M Ag eq. high-grade ounces, (fully-funded for that report, but no guarantees on the 60M figure), the Company would be valued at ~C$1.30 per pro forma prospective Ag Eq. oz. vs. the more advanced high-grade peers at C$4-$12/oz.
Yes, to reiterate, pre-maiden resource is a risk here, but fully-funded drilling, hitting great mineralization, in a known high-grade district is a mitigating factor. In a bull market for precious metals (if we’re in one), taking on extra risk can be prudent.
Look, if Pacifica were valued at C$4+ per pro forma prospective ounce, that would be different. It’s not. If one’s bullish on Ag/Au prices over the next few years, investing in early-stage plays like Pacifica Silver might make sense.
The following table is for illustrative purposes only, Pacifica Silver is pre-maiden resource...
To be clear, not any early-stage junior, only well-funded ones with strong teams, in safe places, with high-grade deposits, projects that are not remote, or at 4,000+ meters elevation (water scarcity), or facing local opposition. Pacifica Silver checks a lot of investment boxes.
Disclosures/disclaimers: The content of this article is for information only. Readers fully understand and agree that nothing contained herein, written by Peter Epstein of Epstein Research [ER], (together, [ER]) about Pacifica Silver, including but not limited to, commentary, opinions, views, assumptions, reported facts, calculations, etc. is not to be considered implicit or explicit investment advice. Nothing contained herein is a recommendation or solicitation to buy or sell any security. [ER] is not responsible under any circumstances for investment actions taken by the reader. [ER] has never been, and is not currently, a registered or licensed financial advisor or broker/dealer, investment advisor, stockbroker, trader, money manager, compliance or legal officer, and does not perform market-making activities. [ER] is not directly employed by any company, group, organization, party, or person. The shares of Pacifica Silver are highly speculative, and not suitable for all investors. Readers understand and agree that investments in small-cap stocks can result in a 100% loss of invested funds. It is assumed and agreed upon by readers that they will consult with their own licensed or registered financial advisors before making investment decisions.
At the time this article was posted, Pacifica Silver was an advertiser on [ER] and Peter Epstein owned shares in the company, acquired in the open market.
Readers understand and agree that they must conduct due diligence above and beyond reading this article. While the author believes he’s diligent in screening out companies that, for any reason whatsoever, are unattractive investment opportunities, he cannot guarantee that his efforts will (or have been) successful. [ER] is not responsible for any perceived, or actual, errors including, but not limited to, commentary, opinions, views, assumptions, reported facts & financial calculations, or for the completeness of this article or future content. [ER] is not expected or required to subsequently follow or cover events & news, or write about any particular company or topic. [ER] is not an expert in any company, industry sector or investment topic.
Comments
Log in or sign up to join the conversation.