Ad is loading...
CJIMF
Price
$0.43
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Aug 23 closing price
MNMRF
Price
$0.02
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 14 closing price
Ad is loading...

CJIMF vs MNMRF

Header iconCJIMF vs MNMRF Comparison
Open Charts CJIMF vs MNMRFBanner chart's image
Gunpoint Exploration
Price$0.43
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$1.82K
CapitalizationN/A
Monumental Energy
Price$0.02
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$2K
CapitalizationN/A
CJIMF vs MNMRF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CJIMF vs. MNMRF 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 CJIMF is a Hold and MNMRF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (CJIMF: $0.44 vs. MNMRF: $0.02)
Brand notoriety: CJIMF and MNMRF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CJIMF: 100% vs. MNMRF: 5%
Market capitalization -- CJIMF: $20.61M vs. MNMRF: $3.26M
CJIMF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $20.61M. MNMRF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $3.26M. 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).

CJIMF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileMNMRF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

CJIMF (@Precious Metals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MNMRF (@Precious Metals) price change was -0.47% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -5.50%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -4.71%, and the average quarterly price growth was -2.33%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-5.50% 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
CJIMF($20.6M) has a higher market cap than MNMRF($3.26M). CJIMF YTD gains are higher at: 31.818 vs. MNMRF (-58.000). CJIMF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -694.7K vs. MNMRF (-2.11M). MNMRF has more cash in the bank: 3.32M vs. CJIMF (1.46M). CJIMF (0) and MNMRF (0) have equivalent revenues.
CJIMFMNMRFCJIMF / MNMRF
Capitalization20.6M3.26M632%
EBITDA-694.7K-2.11M33%
Gain YTD31.818-58.000-55%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash1.46M3.32M44%
Total Debt700KN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CJIMF: Fundamental Ratings
CJIMF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
88
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
90
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
54
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
99
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 %
BAREX15.580.03
+0.19%
BlackRock Real Estate Securities Inv A
RGBEX38.16-0.22
-0.57%
American Funds Global Balanced R4
JIJRX13.27-0.22
-1.63%
JHancock International Dynamic Gr R6
MBCLX21.64-0.43
-1.95%
MassMutual Blue Chip Growth Adm
HNMGX6.35-0.16
-2.46%
Harbor Disruptive Innovation Retirement

CJIMF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CJIMF has been loosely correlated with MXTLF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 60% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CJIMF jumps, then MXTLF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CJIMF
1D Price
Change %
CJIMF100%
N/A
MXTLF - CJIMF
60%
Loosely correlated
N/A
BDLNF - CJIMF
37%
Loosely correlated
-1.03%
MNMRF - CJIMF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CYNXF - CJIMF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CNRIF - CJIMF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

MNMRF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MNMRF and CJIMF have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MNMRF and CJIMF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MNMRF
1D Price
Change %
MNMRF100%
N/A
CJIMF - MNMRF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NIOVF - MNMRF
12%
Poorly correlated
-7.14%
WGLIF - MNMRF
6%
Poorly correlated
-1.83%
DBORF - MNMRF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
ELMGF - MNMRF
4%
Poorly correlated
+4.73%
More