Advertisement
CLLXF vs CMCLF
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 CLLXF is a Hold and CMCLF is a Hold.
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).
CLLXF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCMCLF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CLLXF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- CMCLF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CLLXF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а +4.59% price change this week, while CMCLF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was +3.33% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +4.84%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +9.32%, and the average quarterly price growth was +22.35%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Other Metals/Minerals (+4.84% 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.
| CLLXF | CMCLF | CLLXF / CMCLF | |
| Capitalization | 35.1M | 17.9B | 0% |
| EBITDA | 337K | 10.3B | 0% |
| Gain YTD | -6.003 | 32.854 | -18% |
| P/E Ratio | 1111.11 | 22.22 | 5,000% |
| Revenue | 0 | 173B | - |
| Total Cash | 6.71M | 38.7B | 0% |
| Total Debt | 74.7K | 46.7B | 0% |
CLLXF | CMCLF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 62 | 28 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 98 Overvalued | 10 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 92 | 45 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 90 | 41 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 62 | 48 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 16 | 92 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 9 |
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.
CMCLF's Valuation (10) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CLLXF (98). This means that CMCLF’s stock grew significantly faster than CLLXF’s over the last 12 months.
CMCLF's Profit vs Risk Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CLLXF (92). This means that CMCLF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CLLXF’s over the last 12 months.
CMCLF's SMR Rating (41) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CLLXF (90). This means that CMCLF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CLLXF’s over the last 12 months.
CMCLF's Price Growth Rating (48) in the null industry is in the same range as CLLXF (62). This means that CMCLF’s stock grew similarly to CLLXF’s over the last 12 months.
CLLXF's P/E Growth Rating (16) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CMCLF (92). This means that CLLXF’s stock grew significantly faster than CMCLF’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
Advertisement
CLLXF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CLLXF and GSM have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CLLXF and GSM's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CLLXF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLLXF | 100% | +1.95% | ||
| GSM - CLLXF | 29% Poorly correlated | +3.72% | ||
| TECK - CLLXF | 26% Poorly correlated | -0.08% | ||
| SOUHY - CLLXF | 26% Poorly correlated | +0.41% | ||
| ERO - CLLXF | 25% Poorly correlated | -0.69% | ||
| SCCO - CLLXF | 22% Poorly correlated | -0.45% | ||
More | ||||
CMCLF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CMCLF and CMDRF have been poorly correlated (+12% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CMCLF and CMDRF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CMCLF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMCLF | 100% | -0.78% | ||
| CMDRF - CMCLF | 12% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CNIKF - CMCLF | 9% Poorly correlated | +3.34% | ||
| CLLXF - CMCLF | 3% Poorly correlated | +1.95% | ||
| CRECF - CMCLF | 2% Poorly correlated | -1.31% | ||
| CPPMF - CMCLF | -2% Poorly correlated | +3.47% | ||
More | ||||