Ad is loading...
BTUMF
Price
$0.02
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
LRDJF
Price
$0.07
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
Ad is loading...

BTUMF vs LRDJF

Header iconBTUMF vs LRDJF Comparison
Open Charts BTUMF vs LRDJFBanner chart's image
BTU METALS
Price$0.02
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$24K
CapitalizationN/A
ST JAMES GOLD
Price$0.07
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$25.2K
CapitalizationN/A
BTUMF vs LRDJF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BTUMF vs. LRDJF commentary
Nov 18, 2024

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 BTUMF is a Hold and LRDJF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (BTUMF: $0.02 vs. LRDJF: $0.07)
Brand notoriety: BTUMF and LRDJF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BTUMF: 433% vs. LRDJF: 264%
Market capitalization -- BTUMF: $3.23M vs. LRDJF: $4.91M
BTUMF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $3.23M. LRDJF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $4.91M. 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 $1.04B.

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).

BTUMF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileLRDJF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

BTUMF (@Precious Metals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while LRDJF (@Precious Metals) price change was -29.04% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -2.15%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -6.39%, and the average quarterly price growth was -1.82%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-2.15% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
LRDJF($4.91M) has a higher market cap than BTUMF($3.23M). BTUMF YTD gains are higher at: -31.667 vs. LRDJF (-53.907). BTUMF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -440.56K vs. LRDJF (-11.39M). BTUMF has more cash in the bank: 254K vs. LRDJF (39K). BTUMF has less debt than LRDJF: BTUMF (35K) vs LRDJF (1.21M). BTUMF (0) and LRDJF (0) have equivalent revenues.
BTUMFLRDJFBTUMF / LRDJF
Capitalization3.23M4.91M66%
EBITDA-440.56K-11.39M4%
Gain YTD-31.667-53.90759%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash254K39K651%
Total Debt35K1.21M3%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
LRDJF: Fundamental Ratings
LRDJF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
50
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
99
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
63
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
4
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a

Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
RAPRX10.420.02
+0.19%
Cohen & Steers Real Assets R
RGBHX38.13-0.22
-0.57%
American Funds Global Balanced R5E
MBCYX22.52-0.44
-1.92%
MassMutual Blue Chip Growth Svc
FMKFX20.54-0.44
-2.10%
Fidelity Magellan K6
HIMGX4.70-0.12
-2.49%
Harbor Disruptive Innovation Inv

BTUMF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that BTUMF and FMELF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BTUMF and FMELF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BTUMF
1D Price
Change %
BTUMF100%
N/A
FMELF - BTUMF
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BTLLF - BTUMF
13%
Poorly correlated
+5.29%
LRDJF - BTUMF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CELTF - BTUMF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BYAGF - BTUMF
1%
Poorly correlated
+5.24%
More

LRDJF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that LRDJF and WAMFF have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LRDJF and WAMFF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LRDJF
1D Price
Change %
LRDJF100%
N/A
WAMFF - LRDJF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RSNVF - LRDJF
20%
Poorly correlated
-4.54%
CBGZF - LRDJF
15%
Poorly correlated
-5.56%
CGAU - LRDJF
13%
Poorly correlated
-1.20%
CAHPF - LRDJF
10%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More