CQRLF
Price
$0.01
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 30 closing price
Capitalization
2.04M
CXBMF
Price
$1.58
Change
-$0.01 (-0.63%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
586.8M
Ad is loading...

CQRLF vs CXBMF

Header iconCQRLF vs CXBMF Comparison
Open Charts CQRLF vs CXBMFBanner chart's image
Conquest Resources
Price$0.01
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$10K
Capitalization2.04M
Calibre Mining
Price$1.58
Change-$0.01 (-0.63%)
Volume$188.83K
Capitalization586.8M
CQRLF vs CXBMF Comparison Chart
Loading...
CQRLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
CXBMF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CQRLF vs. CXBMF commentary
Jan 19, 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 CQRLF is a Hold and CXBMF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (CQRLF: $0.01 vs. CXBMF: $1.58)
Brand notoriety: CQRLF and CXBMF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CQRLF: 104% vs. CXBMF: 73%
Market capitalization -- CQRLF: $2.04M vs. CXBMF: $586.8M
CQRLF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $2.04M. CXBMF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $586.8M. 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 $1.06B.

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).

CQRLF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileCXBMF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CQRLF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CXBMF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CQRLF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 1 bearish.
  • CXBMF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CQRLF is a better buy in the short-term than CXBMF.

Price Growth

CQRLF (@Precious Metals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while CXBMF (@Precious Metals) price change was -3.66% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +2.38%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +7.29%, and the average quarterly price growth was +0.47%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+2.38% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CXBMF($587M) has a higher market cap than CQRLF($2.04M). CXBMF YTD gains are higher at: 6.040 vs. CQRLF (0.000). CXBMF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 137M vs. CQRLF (-764.16K). CXBMF has more cash in the bank: 58.3M vs. CQRLF (1.28M). CXBMF has higher revenues than CQRLF: CXBMF (429M) vs CQRLF (0).
CQRLFCXBMFCQRLF / CXBMF
Capitalization2.04M587M0%
EBITDA-764.16K137M-1%
Gain YTD0.0006.040-
P/E RatioN/A12.59-
Revenue0429M-
Total Cash1.28M58.3M2%
Total DebtN/A15.9M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CQRLF vs CXBMF: Fundamental Ratings
CQRLF
CXBMF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
62
Fair valued
72
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10053
SMR RATING
1..100
9684
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8746
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
574
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

CQRLF's Valuation (62) in the null industry is in the same range as CXBMF (72). This means that CQRLF’s stock grew similarly to CXBMF’s over the last 12 months.

CXBMF's Profit vs Risk Rating (53) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CQRLF (100). This means that CXBMF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CQRLF’s over the last 12 months.

CXBMF's SMR Rating (84) in the null industry is in the same range as CQRLF (96). This means that CXBMF’s stock grew similarly to CQRLF’s over the last 12 months.

CXBMF's Price Growth Rating (46) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CQRLF (87). This means that CXBMF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CQRLF’s over the last 12 months.

CXBMF's P/E Growth Rating (4) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CQRLF (57). This means that CXBMF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CQRLF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CQRLFCXBMF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
71%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
90%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
62%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
85%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
67%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
80%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
83%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
74%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
84%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
82%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 21 days ago
86%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
70%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
87%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
81%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
81%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CQRLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
CXBMF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
MMINX12.680.13
+1.04%
MM S&P 500® Index R3
MADFX33.580.24
+0.72%
Matrix Advisors Dividend
MMGEX9.540.06
+0.63%
MassMutual Small Cap Gr Eq A
CIICX36.180.12
+0.33%
American Funds Intl Gr and Inc 529C
HGXRX15.730.04
+0.25%
Hartford Global Impact R3

CQRLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CQRLF has been loosely correlated with GLNS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 33% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CQRLF jumps, then GLNS could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CQRLF
1D Price
Change %
CQRLF100%
N/A
GLNS - CQRLF
33%
Loosely correlated
N/A
RVSDF - CQRLF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CTMCF - CQRLF
10%
Poorly correlated
-2.99%
CXBMF - CQRLF
7%
Poorly correlated
-0.63%
DGDCF - CQRLF
3%
Poorly correlated
+4.24%
More

CXBMF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CXBMF has been loosely correlated with AEM. These tickers have moved in lockstep 58% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CXBMF jumps, then AEM could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CXBMF
1D Price
Change %
CXBMF100%
-0.63%
AEM - CXBMF
58%
Loosely correlated
+1.01%
SAND - CXBMF
57%
Loosely correlated
+0.53%
BTG - CXBMF
57%
Loosely correlated
+0.42%
GOLD - CXBMF
56%
Loosely correlated
+1.59%
MAG - CXBMF
55%
Loosely correlated
+0.60%
More