CGMLF
Price
$1.15
Change
+$0.10 (+9.52%)
Updated
Jul 1 closing price
Capitalization
1.55B
GLNCY
Price
$8.32
Change
-$0.01 (-0.12%)
Updated
Jul 3 closing price
Capitalization
75.42B
32 days until earnings call
Interact to see
Advertisement

CGMLF vs GLNCY

Header iconCGMLF vs GLNCY Comparison
Open Charts CGMLF vs GLNCYBanner chart's image
Chalice Mining
Price$1.15
Change+$0.10 (+9.52%)
Volume$1.1K
Capitalization1.55B
Glencore
Price$8.32
Change-$0.01 (-0.12%)
Volume$369.12K
Capitalization75.42B
CGMLF vs GLNCY Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CGMLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GLNCY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CGMLF vs. GLNCY commentary
Jul 06, 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 CGMLF is a Hold and GLNCY is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 06, 2025
Stock price -- (CGMLF: $1.15 vs. GLNCY: $8.32)
Brand notoriety: CGMLF and GLNCY are both not notable
Both companies represent the Other Metals/Minerals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CGMLF: 12% vs. GLNCY: 41%
Market capitalization -- CGMLF: $1.55B vs. GLNCY: $75.42B
CGMLF [@Other Metals/Minerals] is valued at $1.55B. GLNCY’s [@Other Metals/Minerals] market capitalization is $75.42B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Other Metals/Minerals] industry ranges from $223.12B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Other Metals/Minerals] industry is $3.1B.

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).

CGMLF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGLNCY’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CGMLF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GLNCY’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

CGMLF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а +9.52% price change this week, while GLNCY (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was +5.72% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +3.12%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +8.79%, and the average quarterly price growth was +30.02%.

Reported Earning Dates

GLNCY is expected to report earnings on Aug 06, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Other Metals/Minerals (+3.12% weekly)

The category includes companies that explore for, mine and extract metals, such as copper, diamonds, nickel, cobalt ore, lead, zinc and uranium. BHP, Rio Tinto and Southern Copper Corporation are major players in this space.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
GLNCY($75.4B) has a higher market cap than CGMLF($1.55B). CGMLF YTD gains are higher at: 81.102 vs. GLNCY (-3.223). GLNCY has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 31.6B vs. CGMLF (-70.16M). GLNCY has more cash in the bank: 1.45B vs. CGMLF (115M). CGMLF has less debt than GLNCY: CGMLF (349K) vs GLNCY (28.8B). GLNCY has higher revenues than CGMLF: GLNCY (256B) vs CGMLF (125K).
CGMLFGLNCYCGMLF / GLNCY
Capitalization1.55B75.4B2%
EBITDA-70.16M31.6B-0%
Gain YTD81.102-3.223-2,516%
P/E RatioN/A4.53-
Revenue125K256B0%
Total Cash115M1.45B8%
Total Debt349K28.8B0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CGMLF vs GLNCY: Fundamental Ratings
CGMLF
GLNCY
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5059
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
96
Overvalued
94
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
9253
SMR RATING
1..100
93100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3549
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
10068
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.

GLNCY's Valuation (94) in the null industry is in the same range as CGMLF (96). This means that GLNCY’s stock grew similarly to CGMLF’s over the last 12 months.

GLNCY's Profit vs Risk Rating (53) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CGMLF (92). This means that GLNCY’s stock grew somewhat faster than CGMLF’s over the last 12 months.

CGMLF's SMR Rating (93) in the null industry is in the same range as GLNCY (100). This means that CGMLF’s stock grew similarly to GLNCY’s over the last 12 months.

CGMLF's Price Growth Rating (35) in the null industry is in the same range as GLNCY (49). This means that CGMLF’s stock grew similarly to GLNCY’s over the last 12 months.

GLNCY's P/E Growth Rating (68) in the null industry is in the same range as CGMLF (100). This means that GLNCY’s stock grew similarly to CGMLF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CGMLFGLNCY
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
74%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
81%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
59%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
62%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
71%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
63%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
63%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
70%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
70%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
64%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
68%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
64%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
67%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
77%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
75%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CGMLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GLNCY
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 %
HLGEX53.960.71
+1.33%
JPMorgan Mid Cap Growth I
FSCRX24.420.22
+0.91%
Fidelity Small Cap Discovery
DESAX24.050.18
+0.75%
DWS ESG Core Equity A
DGLCX18.980.11
+0.58%
BNY Mellon Global Stock - C
LZFIX9.850.02
+0.20%
Lazard Equity Franchise Inst Shr

CGMLF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CGMLF
1D Price
Change %
CGMLF100%
N/A
NAK - CGMLF
31%
Poorly correlated
-5.41%
CVVUF - CGMLF
26%
Poorly correlated
+0.63%
PMETF - CGMLF
20%
Poorly correlated
+4.84%
GLNCY - CGMLF
20%
Poorly correlated
-0.12%
ATOXF - CGMLF
20%
Poorly correlated
-2.12%
More