CGLCF
Price
$0.14
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 18 closing price
MAG
Price
$13.82
Change
-$0.94 (-6.37%)
Updated
Dec 18, 04:59 PM (EDT)
97 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

CGLCF vs MAG

Header iconCGLCF vs MAG Comparison
Open Charts CGLCF vs MAGBanner chart's image
Cassiar Gold
Price$0.14
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$68.3K
CapitalizationN/A
MAG Silver
Price$13.82
Change-$0.94 (-6.37%)
Volume$2.87K
CapitalizationN/A
CGLCF vs MAG Comparison Chart
Loading...
CGLCF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MAG
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CGLCF vs. MAG commentary
Dec 19, 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 CGLCF is a Hold and MAG is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (CGLCF: $0.14 vs. MAG: $13.81)
Brand notoriety: CGLCF and MAG are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CGLCF: 45% vs. MAG: 85%
Market capitalization -- CGLCF: $28.8M vs. MAG: $1.12B
CGLCF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $28.8M. MAG’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $1.12B. 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).

CGLCF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMAG’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CGLCF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MAG’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CGLCF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • MAG’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CGLCF is a better buy in the short-term than MAG.

Price Growth

CGLCF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +3.11% price change this week, while MAG (@Precious Metals) price change was -13.31% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -5.24%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.88%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.01%.

Reported Earning Dates

MAG is expected to report earnings on Mar 26, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-5.24% 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
MAG($1.12B) has a higher market cap than CGLCF($28.8M). MAG YTD gains are higher at: 41.787 vs. CGLCF (-46.094). CGLCF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -3.3M vs. MAG (-13.89M). MAG has more cash in the bank: 68.7M vs. CGLCF (2.25M). CGLCF has less debt than MAG: CGLCF (108K) vs MAG (154K). CGLCF (0) and MAG (0) have equivalent revenues.
CGLCFMAGCGLCF / MAG
Capitalization28.8M1.12B3%
EBITDA-3.3M-13.89M24%
Gain YTD-46.09441.787-110%
P/E RatioN/A22.98-
Revenue00-
Total Cash2.25M68.7M3%
Total Debt108K154K70%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CGLCF vs MAG: Fundamental Ratings
CGLCF
MAG
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5153
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
28
Undervalued
94
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10068
SMR RATING
1..100
9256
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8446
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
10084
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

CGLCF's Valuation (28) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for MAG (94) in the Precious Metals industry. This means that CGLCF’s stock grew significantly faster than MAG’s over the last 12 months.

MAG's Profit vs Risk Rating (68) in the Precious Metals industry is in the same range as CGLCF (100) in the null industry. This means that MAG’s stock grew similarly to CGLCF’s over the last 12 months.

MAG's SMR Rating (56) in the Precious Metals industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CGLCF (92) in the null industry. This means that MAG’s stock grew somewhat faster than CGLCF’s over the last 12 months.

MAG's Price Growth Rating (46) in the Precious Metals industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CGLCF (84) in the null industry. This means that MAG’s stock grew somewhat faster than CGLCF’s over the last 12 months.

MAG's P/E Growth Rating (84) in the Precious Metals industry is in the same range as CGLCF (100) in the null industry. This means that MAG’s stock grew similarly to CGLCF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CGLCFMAG
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
74%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
81%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
84%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
81%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
77%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
78%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
85%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
78%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
86%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
79%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 27 days ago
81%
Bullish Trend 20 days ago
78%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 8 days ago
86%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
81%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
81%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
89%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CGLCF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MAG
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
QMCO23.720.45
+1.93%
Quantum Corp
ARI9.06-0.06
-0.66%
Apollo Commercial Real Estate Finance
SCCO96.74-0.65
-0.67%
Southern Copper Corp
RMBS58.18-0.96
-1.62%
Rambus
SB3.57-0.06
-1.65%
Safe Bulkers

CGLCF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CGLCF has been loosely correlated with STLRF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 37% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CGLCF jumps, then STLRF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CGLCF
1D Price
Change %
CGLCF100%
-3.57%
STLRF - CGLCF
37%
Loosely correlated
+0.46%
NSUPF - CGLCF
34%
Loosely correlated
-2.08%
PAAS - CGLCF
31%
Poorly correlated
-0.05%
APGOF - CGLCF
30%
Poorly correlated
-2.85%
MAG - CGLCF
30%
Poorly correlated
-0.61%
More

MAG and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MAG has been closely correlated with PAAS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 86% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if MAG jumps, then PAAS could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MAG
1D Price
Change %
MAG100%
-0.61%
PAAS - MAG
86%
Closely correlated
-0.05%
AG - MAG
82%
Closely correlated
-0.84%
HL - MAG
82%
Closely correlated
+0.57%
AEM - MAG
78%
Closely correlated
-1.10%
CDE - MAG
78%
Closely correlated
+0.16%
More