The NICO deposit is located in the southern portion of the Paleoproterozoic Great Bear magmatic zone, Northwest Territories, Canada. The majority of the mineralization lies within the Bowl Zone, hosted by the Treasure Lake Group (TLG), where heavily altered precursor rocks are interpreted to be carbonate-rich wackes and siltstones. These rocks are crosscut by a set of pre-ore quartz±calcite+amphibole+K-feldspar veins (S1). The Co–Au–Bi (±W–Cu–Mo) mineralization at NICO is contained in stratabound ore lenses within the Bowl Zone, and comprises a prograde assemblage of Co-rich arsenopyrite (arsenopyrite I) and loellingite, cobaltite, pyrite, actinolite, ferrohornblende, biotite and rare scheelite (±molybdenite) along with minor magnetite and amphibole. Retrograde assemblages resulted from re-crystallization of the Co-bearing phases to form arsenopyrite II and III, along with precipitation of marcasite, pyrite, hastingsite, native Bi–Au (±Te) and minor bismuthinite and magnetite. The latest stage of retrograde mineralization comprises chalcopyrite, hastingsite, chlorite, and hematite (±emplectite). Two sets of barren quartz±dolomite+amphibole+K-feldspar+chalcopyrite veins (S2 and S3) post-date the mineralization. The Southern Breccia zone hosts minor U–Cu–Mo mineralization and is interpreted to be the deepest portion of the NICO system. Two molybdenite samples from the Bowl Zone and the Southern Breccia yielded Re–Os ages of 1865±9 and 1877±8Ma, respectively, consistent with the interpreted ca. 1870Ma age of the NICO deposit. This age is also synchronous with the onset of magmatism in the Great Bear magmatic arc (ca. 1875–1850Ma).Ore mineral δ34S values (3.3–6.7‰, sulfides) indicate that crustal sulfur was assimilated by upwelling felsic magmatic melts. The δ18O values of the fluids precipitating magnetite and Co-rich arsenopyrite (6 and 8‰), and from pre- and syn-mineralization magnetite (−0.8 to 1.5‰) support a magmatic-hydrothermal origin of the fluids. Two out of three calcite samples from pre-(S1) and post-ore (S3) veins have also δ13C values consistent with a magmatic origin (−5.5 to −3.6‰). However, one calcite sample from the S3 veins has a value that indicates a reduced sulfur source (−15.6‰). This value is similar to those of the much younger (<1843Ma) giant quartz veins cutting the GBMZ rocks. The quartz δ18O values suggest that S1 (12.7‰) formed at higher temperatures than S2 (13.2–19.14‰) and S3 (9.4–17.1‰), or that in the latter two generations of veins, 18O was enriched during fluid/rock equilibration.Secondary trails of native Bi in S1 vein quartz are associated with liquid–vapor (LV) and liquid–vapor–halite (LVS) inclusions, which indicates that Bi, and possibly Au, were transported in saline to hyper-saline brines (LV-Bi, 2–16wt.% NaCl equiv., 8–22wt.% CaCl2 equiv.; LVS-Bi, >37wt.% NaCl equiv.), with homogenization temperatures of 137–216°C and 192 to >350°C for LV-Bi (ThL+V→L) and LVS-Bi (ThL+S→L), respectively. The presence of calcium-rich fluids might indicate extensive equilibration of those solutions with the host TLG rocks. If a pressure correction is applied to the LV inclusions using a minimum entrapment temperature of 271.4°C (the Bi melting point), a minimum crystallization depth of between approximately 5 and 8km is indicated.Trace element analyses carried out in this study and compiled from Acosta-Góngora et al. (2014) show that the least altered metasedimentary TLG rocks contain up to six times more As (Carbonate unit, 30.5ppm) than the average upper continental crust. Conversely, concentrations of Au (<2ppb), Co (10ppm) and Cu (12ppm) are lower than the crustal values. As such, it is possible that the TLG was a source of As, but is a less likely source of Au, Co and Cu for the NICO deposit; this further supports a magmatic-hydrothermal origin for the metals. Nonetheless, the plurikilometer alteration halo of the NICO system indicates that large amounts of elements could have been leached from the TLG, and potentially some were incorporated to the system. However, detailed studies on structural geology, geochemical modeling, and mass balance calculations need to be carried out to consider if such a scenario is feasible.