CRSXF
Price
$0.15
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jan 3 closing price
Capitalization
41.3M
GCLMF
Price
$0.01
Change
-$0.11 (-91.67%)
Updated
Dec 30 closing price
Capitalization
5.33M
Ad is loading...

CRSXF vs GCLMF

Header iconCRSXF vs GCLMF Comparison
Open Charts CRSXF vs GCLMFBanner chart's image
Corsa Coal
Price$0.15
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$1.02K
Capitalization41.3M
GCM Resources
Price$0.01
Change-$0.11 (-91.67%)
Volume$4.1K
Capitalization5.33M
CRSXF vs GCLMF Comparison Chart
Loading...
CRSXF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GCLMF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CRSXF vs. GCLMF commentary
Jan 20, 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 CRSXF is a Hold and GCLMF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 20, 2025
Stock price -- (CRSXF: $0.15 vs. GCLMF: $0.01)
Brand notoriety: CRSXF and GCLMF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Coal industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CRSXF: 1% vs. GCLMF: 16%
Market capitalization -- CRSXF: $41.3M vs. GCLMF: $5.33M
CRSXF [@Coal] is valued at $41.3M. GCLMF’s [@Coal] market capitalization is $5.33M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Coal] industry ranges from $75.88B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Coal] industry is $6.45B.

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).

CRSXF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGCLMF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CRSXF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GCLMF’s TA Score has 0 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CRSXF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 2 bearish.
  • GCLMF’s TA Score: 0 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CRSXF is a better buy in the short-term than GCLMF.

Price Growth

CRSXF (@Coal) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while GCLMF (@Coal) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Coal industry was +1.26%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -6.82%, and the average quarterly price growth was -9.50%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Coal (+1.26% weekly)

Companies that mine, process and distribute coal and lignite. Coal goes towards around 30% of global energy production, and is heavily relied upon for electricity generation. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P., Peabody Energy Corporation and Arch Coal Inc. are major coal companies in the U.S.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CRSXF($41.3M) has a higher market cap than GCLMF($5.33M). CRSXF YTD gains are higher at: 3.815 vs. GCLMF (0.000). GCLMF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -1.13M vs. CRSXF (-4.31M). CRSXF has more cash in the bank: 5.44M vs. GCLMF (740K). GCLMF has less debt than CRSXF: GCLMF (4.94M) vs CRSXF (31.3M). CRSXF has higher revenues than GCLMF: CRSXF (175M) vs GCLMF (0).
CRSXFGCLMFCRSXF / GCLMF
Capitalization41.3M5.33M774%
EBITDA-4.31M-1.13M381%
Gain YTD3.8150.000-
P/E Ratio6.67N/A-
Revenue175M0-
Total Cash5.44M740K735%
Total Debt31.3M4.94M634%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CRSXF vs GCLMF: Fundamental Ratings
CRSXF
GCLMF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
53
Fair valued
49
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
9191
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8799
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
42100
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.

GCLMF's Valuation (49) in the null industry is in the same range as CRSXF (53). This means that GCLMF’s stock grew similarly to CRSXF’s over the last 12 months.

GCLMF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as CRSXF (100). This means that GCLMF’s stock grew similarly to CRSXF’s over the last 12 months.

GCLMF's SMR Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as CRSXF (91). This means that GCLMF’s stock grew similarly to CRSXF’s over the last 12 months.

CRSXF's Price Growth Rating (87) in the null industry is in the same range as GCLMF (99). This means that CRSXF’s stock grew similarly to GCLMF’s over the last 12 months.

CRSXF's P/E Growth Rating (42) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GCLMF (100). This means that CRSXF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GCLMF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CRSXFGCLMF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
88%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
86%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
10%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
83%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
81%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
12%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
89%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
14%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 17 days ago
84%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 21 days ago
89%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CRSXF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GCLMF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
FNGU597.0020.60
+3.57%
MicroSectors™ FANG+™ 3X Leveraged ETN
DJAN39.240.04
+0.10%
FT Vest US Equity Dp Bffr ETF Jan
QTAP37.93N/A
N/A
Innovator Growth-100 Acltd Ps ETF™ April
DFIP40.70-0.02
-0.05%
Dimensional Inflation-Protected Sec ETF
ISHG67.01-0.11
-0.16%
iShares 1-3 Year International TrsBd ETF

CRSXF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CRSXF and SXC have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CRSXF and SXC's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CRSXF
1D Price
Change %
CRSXF100%
N/A
SXC - CRSXF
21%
Poorly correlated
+0.59%
CSUAY - CRSXF
12%
Poorly correlated
+1.52%
ITAYY - CRSXF
9%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MOAEY - CRSXF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CUAEF - CRSXF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

GCLMF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GCLMF and CRSXF have been poorly correlated (+3% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GCLMF and CRSXF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GCLMF
1D Price
Change %
GCLMF100%
N/A
CRSXF - GCLMF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MOAEF - GCLMF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CUAEF - GCLMF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MOAEY - GCLMF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CCOZY - GCLMF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More