Ad is loading...
EMUSF
Price
$0.07
Change
+$0.01 (+16.67%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
SMAGF
Price
$0.41
Change
+$0.03 (+7.89%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
Ad is loading...

EMUSF vs SMAGF

Header iconEMUSF vs SMAGF Comparison
Open Charts EMUSF vs SMAGFBanner chart's image
ELECTRIC METALS USA
Price$0.07
Change+$0.01 (+16.67%)
Volume$108.95K
CapitalizationN/A
Soma Gold
Price$0.41
Change+$0.03 (+7.89%)
Volume$29K
CapitalizationN/A
EMUSF vs SMAGF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
EMUSF vs. SMAGF commentary
Nov 18, 2024

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 EMUSF is a Hold and SMAGF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (EMUSF: $0.07 vs. SMAGF: $0.41)
Brand notoriety: EMUSF and SMAGF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: EMUSF: 164% vs. SMAGF: 162%
Market capitalization -- EMUSF: $32.3M vs. SMAGF: $39.28M
EMUSF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $32.3M. SMAGF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $39.28M. 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 $1.04B.

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).

EMUSF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSMAGF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

EMUSF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +8.83% price change this week, while SMAGF (@Precious Metals) price change was -4.59% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -5.50%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -4.71%, and the average quarterly price growth was -2.33%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-5.50% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
SMAGF($39.3M) has a higher market cap than EMUSF($32.3M). SMAGF YTD gains are higher at: -12.191 vs. EMUSF (-41.445). SMAGF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 16.8M vs. EMUSF (-2.7M). SMAGF has more cash in the bank: 680K vs. EMUSF (533K). EMUSF has less debt than SMAGF: EMUSF (177K) vs SMAGF (29.6M). SMAGF has higher revenues than EMUSF: SMAGF (50.3M) vs EMUSF (0).
EMUSFSMAGFEMUSF / SMAGF
Capitalization32.3M39.3M82%
EBITDA-2.7M16.8M-16%
Gain YTD-41.445-12.191340%
P/E RatioN/A625.00-
Revenue050.3M-
Total Cash533K680K78%
Total Debt177K29.6M1%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
SMAGF: Fundamental Ratings
SMAGF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
76
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
60
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
53
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
7
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/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.

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
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
CRYPTO / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
EGLD.X31.8530982.942833
+10.18%
MultiversX cryptocurrency
FXS.X2.2995390.086814
+3.92%
Frax Share cryptocurrency
IBHD23.230.03
+0.13%
iShares iBonds 2024 Term HY and Inc ETF
IQM65.28-1.36
-2.05%
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
IZRL20.43-0.49
-2.32%
ARK Israel Innovative Technology ETF

EMUSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that EMUSF and SCTSF have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that EMUSF and SCTSF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To EMUSF
1D Price
Change %
EMUSF100%
+7.05%
SCTSF - EMUSF
28%
Poorly correlated
-5.75%
SMAGF - EMUSF
25%
Poorly correlated
+5.60%
STLRF - EMUSF
21%
Poorly correlated
-0.46%
SASKF - EMUSF
18%
Poorly correlated
+12.80%
AKEMF - EMUSF
11%
Poorly correlated
-1.05%
More

SMAGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SMAGF has been loosely correlated with PAAS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 43% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if SMAGF jumps, then PAAS could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SMAGF
1D Price
Change %
SMAGF100%
+5.60%
PAAS - SMAGF
43%
Loosely correlated
-2.15%
MAG - SMAGF
40%
Loosely correlated
-1.97%
MTA - SMAGF
39%
Loosely correlated
-7.17%
HL - SMAGF
38%
Loosely correlated
-1.79%
AEM - SMAGF
37%
Loosely correlated
-1.13%
More