AUCCF
Price
$0.02
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jan 15 closing price
Capitalization
980.1K
PVGDF
Price
$0.19
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
7.2M
Ad is loading...

AUCCF vs PVGDF

Header iconAUCCF vs PVGDF Comparison
Open Charts AUCCF vs PVGDFBanner chart's image
IBERO MNG
Price$0.02
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$25K
Capitalization980.1K
Provenance Gold
Price$0.19
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$145K
Capitalization7.2M
AUCCF vs PVGDF Comparison Chart
Loading...
AUCCF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
PVGDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
AUCCF vs. PVGDF commentary
Jan 19, 2025

To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is AUCCF is a Hold and PVGDF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (AUCCF: $0.02 vs. PVGDF: $0.19)
Brand notoriety: AUCCF and PVGDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: AUCCF: 543% vs. PVGDF: 88%
Market capitalization -- AUCCF: $980.1K vs. PVGDF: $7.2M
AUCCF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $980.1K. PVGDF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $7.2M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Precious Metals] industry ranges from $47.49B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Precious Metals] industry is $1.06B.

Long-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).

AUCCF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whilePVGDF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • AUCCF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • PVGDF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, PVGDF is a better buy in the long-term than AUCCF.

Short-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.

If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.

AUCCF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while PVGDF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • AUCCF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 2 bearish.
  • PVGDF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 0 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, PVGDF is a better buy in the short-term than AUCCF.

Price Growth

AUCCF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -46.00% price change this week, while PVGDF (@Precious Metals) price change was -4.41% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +2.38%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +7.29%, and the average quarterly price growth was +0.47%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+2.38% weekly)

The Precious Metals industry is engaged in exploring/mining metals that are considered to be rare and/or have a high economic value. Popular precious metals include gold, platinum and silver - all three of which are largely used in jewelry, art and coinage alongwith having some industrial uses as well. Precious metals used in industrial processes include iridium, (used in specialty alloys), and palladium ( used in electronics and chemical applications). Historically, precious metals have traded at much higher prices than common industrial metals. Newmont Goldcorp Corp, Barrick Gold Corp and Freeport-McMoRan are few of the major precious metals producing companies in the U.S.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
PVGDF($7.2M) has a higher market cap than AUCCF($980K). PVGDF YTD gains are higher at: 0.421 vs. AUCCF (-46.000). PVGDF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -667.39K vs. AUCCF (-1.02M). AUCCF has more cash in the bank: 616K vs. PVGDF (103K). AUCCF (0) and PVGDF (0) have equivalent revenues.
AUCCFPVGDFAUCCF / PVGDF
Capitalization980K7.2M14%
EBITDA-1.02M-667.39K153%
Gain YTD-46.0000.421-10,914%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash616K103K598%
Total DebtN/A47.5K-
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
AUCCFPVGDF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
78%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
71%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
89%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
83%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
47%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
36%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
80%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
35%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
80%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 17 days ago
77%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
32%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
AUCCF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
PVGDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
FELIX94.382.47
+2.69%
Fidelity Advisor Semiconductors I
STSVX19.000.13
+0.69%
BNY Mellon Sm Cp Val I
PEQRX35.050.16
+0.46%
Putnam Large Cap Value R
MXECX9.540.04
+0.42%
Empower Core Strategies Intl Eq Instl
MNMWX14.270.03
+0.21%
Manning & Napier Pro-Blend Mod Trm W

AUCCF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that AUCCF and CDNMF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that AUCCF and CDNMF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To AUCCF
1D Price
Change %
AUCCF100%
N/A
CDNMF - AUCCF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FTZFF - AUCCF
29%
Poorly correlated
-6.81%
MRIRF - AUCCF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
TAJIF - AUCCF
27%
Poorly correlated
+20.88%
MRTMF - AUCCF
21%
Poorly correlated
+9.20%
More

PVGDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that PVGDF and AUCCF have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PVGDF and AUCCF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To PVGDF
1D Price
Change %
PVGDF100%
-0.47%
AUCCF - PVGDF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
AUGG - PVGDF
21%
Poorly correlated
+5.23%
FYMNF - PVGDF
20%
Poorly correlated
+80.60%
OCGSF - PVGDF
10%
Poorly correlated
+1.26%
RSNVF - PVGDF
9%
Poorly correlated
-0.77%
More