Comparison Overview

Wheaton Precious Metals

VS

Alcoa

Wheaton Precious Metals

Suite 3500 - 1021 West Hastings St. , None, Vancouver, British Columbia, CA, V6E 0C3
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 800 and 849

Wheaton is the world’s premier precious metals streaming company with the highest-quality portfolio of long-life, low-cost assets. Its business model offers investors leverage to commodity prices and exploration upside but with a much lower risk profile than a traditional mining company. Wheaton delivers amongst the highest cash operating margins in the mining industry, allowing it to pay a competitive dividend and continue to grow through accretive acquisitions. As a result, Wheaton has consistently outperformed gold and silver, as well as other mining investments. Wheaton creates sustainable value through streaming. Please refer to our Social Media Engagement Guidelines: http://ow.ly/H5CY30bOiYZ

NAICS: 212
NAICS Definition: Mining (except Oil and Gas)
Employees: 56
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Alcoa

201 Isabella St., Pittsburgh, PA, 15212, US
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

Alcoa (NYSE: AA) is a global industry leader in bauxite, alumina and aluminum products with a vision to reinvent the aluminum industry for a sustainable future. With a values-based approach that encompasses integrity, operating excellence, care for people and courageous leadership, our purpose is to Turn Raw Potential into Real Progress. Since developing the process that made aluminum an affordable and vital part of modern life, our talented Alcoans have developed breakthrough innovations and best practices that have led to greater efficiency, safety, sustainability and stronger communities wherever we operate.

NAICS: 212
NAICS Definition: Mining (except Oil and Gas)
Employees: 16,336
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/wheatonpm.jpeg
Wheaton Precious Metals
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/alcoa.jpeg
Alcoa
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Wheaton Precious Metals
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Alcoa
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mining Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Wheaton Precious Metals in 2025.

Incidents vs Mining Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Alcoa in 2025.

Incident History — Wheaton Precious Metals (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Wheaton Precious Metals cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Alcoa (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Alcoa cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/wheatonpm.jpeg
Wheaton Precious Metals
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/alcoa.jpeg
Alcoa
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Wheaton Precious Metals company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Alcoa company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Alcoa company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Wheaton Precious Metals company.

In the current year, Alcoa company and Wheaton Precious Metals company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Alcoa company nor Wheaton Precious Metals company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Alcoa company nor Wheaton Precious Metals company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Alcoa company nor Wheaton Precious Metals company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals company nor Alcoa company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals nor Alcoa holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals company nor Alcoa company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Alcoa company employs more people globally than Wheaton Precious Metals company, reflecting its scale as a Mining.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals nor Alcoa holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals nor Alcoa holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals nor Alcoa holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals nor Alcoa holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals nor Alcoa holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Wheaton Precious Metals nor Alcoa holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H