CLRSF
Price
$0.04
Change
-$0.01 (-20.00%)
Updated
May 19 closing price
Capitalization
9.02M
FNICF
Price
$0.03
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
May 21 closing price
Capitalization
15.05M
Interact to see
Advertisement

CLRSF vs FNICF

Header iconCLRSF vs FNICF Comparison
Open Charts CLRSF vs FNICFBanner chart's image
CASTILE RES
Price$0.04
Change-$0.01 (-20.00%)
Volume$15K
Capitalization9.02M
Fathom Nickel
Price$0.03
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$20K
Capitalization15.05M
CLRSF vs FNICF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CLRSF vs. FNICF commentary
May 22, 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 CLRSF is a Hold and FNICF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
May 22, 2025
Stock price -- (CLRSF: $0.04 vs. FNICF: $0.03)
Brand notoriety: CLRSF and FNICF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Other Metals/Minerals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CLRSF: 175% vs. FNICF: 22%
Market capitalization -- CLRSF: $9.02M vs. FNICF: $15.05M
CLRSF [@Other Metals/Minerals] is valued at $9.02M. FNICF’s [@Other Metals/Minerals] market capitalization is $15.05M. 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 $3.22B.

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).

CLRSF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileFNICF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

CLRSF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а -4.53% price change this week, while FNICF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was +10.68% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +2.24%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +6.93%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.50%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Other Metals/Minerals (+2.24% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
FNICF($15M) has a higher market cap than CLRSF($9.02M). FNICF YTD gains are higher at: 32.143 vs. CLRSF (-7.708). FNICF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -1.76M vs. CLRSF (-2.61M).
CLRSFFNICFCLRSF / FNICF
Capitalization9.02M15M60%
EBITDA-2.61M-1.76M148%
Gain YTD-7.70832.143-24%
P/E RatioN/A2.37-
RevenueN/A0-
Total CashN/A524K-
Total DebtN/A258K-
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
Interact to see
Advertisement
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
LAVLX33.12N/A
N/A
Lord Abbett Mid Cap Stock A
FMVQX54.56N/A
N/A
Nuveen Mid Cap Value 1 R6
TGVAX29.32-0.27
-0.91%
Thornburg International Equity A
RIDEX25.78-0.24
-0.92%
American Funds Income Fund of Amer R4
ABLSX12.97-0.21
-1.59%
American Beacon Balanced Adv

CLRSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CLRSF and FRSPF have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CLRSF and FRSPF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CLRSF
1D Price
Change %
CLRSF100%
N/A
FRSPF - CLRSF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
ELMTF - CLRSF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
TCVNF - CLRSF
12%
Poorly correlated
+1.90%
CGNMF - CLRSF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FNICF - CLRSF
3%
Poorly correlated
+0.39%
More

FNICF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that FNICF and BRIOF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FNICF and BRIOF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FNICF
1D Price
Change %
FNICF100%
+0.39%
BRIOF - FNICF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RSNUF - FNICF
13%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PMMCF - FNICF
12%
Poorly correlated
+5.19%
JNOMF - FNICF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CLRSF - FNICF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More