CLLMF
Price
$0.08
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Oct 1 closing price
TSGZF
Price
$0.11
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Oct 4 closing price
Ad is loading...

CLLMF vs TSGZF

Header iconCLLMF vs TSGZF Comparison
Open Charts CLLMF vs TSGZFBanner chart's image
COLLECTIVE METALS
Price$0.08
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$1K
CapitalizationN/A
TriStar Gold
Price$0.11
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$2.5K
CapitalizationN/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
CLLMF vs TSGZF Comparison Chart
Loading...
VS
CLLMF vs. TSGZF commentary
Oct 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 CLLMF is a Hold and TSGZF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Oct 18, 2024
Stock price -- (CLLMF: $0.08 vs. TSGZF: $0.07)
Brand notoriety: CLLMF and TSGZF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CLLMF: 26% vs. TSGZF: 30%
Market capitalization -- CLLMF: $6.32M vs. TSGZF: $24.06M
CLLMF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $6.32M. TSGZF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $24.06M. 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 $1.02B.

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).

CLLMF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileTSGZF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • CLLMF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • TSGZF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, both CLLMF and TSGZF are a bad buy in the long-term.

Price Growth

CLLMF (@Precious Metals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while TSGZF (@Precious Metals) price change was -6.88% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +2.12%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +11.06%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.61%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+2.12% 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
TSGZF($24.1M) has a higher market cap than CLLMF($6.33M). TSGZF (15.086) and CLLMF (14.857) have similar YTD gains . CLLMF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -880.86K vs. TSGZF (-2.18M). TSGZF has more cash in the bank: 4.03M vs. CLLMF (989K). CLLMF (0) and TSGZF (0) have equivalent revenues.
CLLMFTSGZFCLLMF / TSGZF
Capitalization6.33M24.1M26%
EBITDA-880.86K-2.18M40%
Gain YTD14.85715.08698%
P/E RatioN/A34.01-
Revenue00-
Total Cash989K4.03M25%
Total Debt2.05KN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
TSGZF: Fundamental Ratings
TSGZF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
53
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
76
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
93
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
65
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
96
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
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
AAPL232.150.37
+0.16%
Apple
SPY582.350.05
+0.01%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust
TSLA220.89-0.44
-0.20%
Tesla
BTC.X67399.836000-212.882810
-0.31%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
GME21.41-0.25
-1.15%
GameStop Corp

CLLMF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CLLMF
1D Price
Change %
CLLMF100%
N/A
DRDGF - CLLMF
23%
Poorly correlated
+14.52%
TSGZF - CLLMF
21%
Poorly correlated
-8.64%
ONXGF - CLLMF
9%
Poorly correlated
N/A
EMUSF - CLLMF
4%
Poorly correlated
-4.61%
AKEMF - CLLMF
2%
Poorly correlated
-0.44%
More

TSGZF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that TSGZF and TIHRF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that TSGZF and TIHRF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To TSGZF
1D Price
Change %
TSGZF100%
-8.64%
TIHRF - TSGZF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CLLMF - TSGZF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
ARMN - TSGZF
7%
Poorly correlated
-0.85%
UGDIF - TSGZF
3%
Poorly correlated
-11.98%
USGDF - TSGZF
2%
Poorly correlated
+1.27%
More