CLRSF
Price
$0.04
Change
-$0.01 (-20.00%)
Updated
Aug 28 closing price
Capitalization
15.33M
FNICF
Price
$0.02
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Sep 25 closing price
Capitalization
3.63M
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$257
Capitalization15.33M
Fathom Nickel
Price$0.02
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$498.57K
Capitalization3.63M
CLRSF vs FNICF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CLRSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
FNICF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CLRSF vs. FNICF commentary
Sep 26, 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 Buy and FNICF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 26, 2025
Stock price -- (CLRSF: $0.04 vs. FNICF: $0.02)
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: 5% vs. FNICF: 340%
Market capitalization -- CLRSF: $15.33M vs. FNICF: $3.63M
CLRSF [@Other Metals/Minerals] is valued at $15.33M. FNICF’s [@Other Metals/Minerals] market capitalization is $3.63M. 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 $2.44B.

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, both CLRSF and FNICF are a bad buy in the long-term.

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.

CLRSF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while FNICF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CLRSF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • FNICF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CLRSF is a better buy in the short-term than FNICF.

Price Growth

CLRSF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while FNICF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was -16.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +5.57%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +42.35%, and the average quarterly price growth was +308.83%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Other Metals/Minerals (+5.57% 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
CLRSF($15.3M) has a higher market cap than FNICF($3.63M). FNICF YTD gains are higher at: 7.143 vs. CLRSF (-17.083). FNICF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -710.12K vs. CLRSF (-1.92M).
CLRSFFNICFCLRSF / FNICF
Capitalization15.3M3.63M421%
EBITDA-1.92M-710.12K270%
Gain YTD-17.0837.143-239%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
RevenueN/A0-
Total CashN/A89.3K-
Total DebtN/AN/A-
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CLRSFFNICF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
40%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
27%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
88%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
38%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
83%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
18%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
23%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
88%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
86%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 8 days ago
90%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
10%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CLRSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
FNICF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
T28.30-0.02
-0.07%
AT&T
LVTX1.59N/A
-0.12%
LAVA Therapeutics NV
SLP14.68-0.16
-1.08%
Simulations Plus
LPG31.47-0.39
-1.22%
DORIAN LPG Ltd
CHE450.46-6.52
-1.43%
Chemed Corp

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
+6.77%
ELMTF - CLRSF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
TCVNF - CLRSF
12%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FNICF - CLRSF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SVMLF - CLRSF
1%
Poorly correlated
+1.20%
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%
N/A
BRIOF - FNICF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RSNUF - FNICF
13%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PMMCF - FNICF
12%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JNOMF - FNICF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CLRSF - FNICF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More