ESGLF
Price
$0.04
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 17 closing price
FMELF
Price
$0.02
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Oct 28 closing price
Ad is loading...

ESGLF vs FMELF

Header iconESGLF vs FMELF Comparison
Open Charts ESGLF vs FMELFBanner chart's image
EnviroGold Global
Price$0.04
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$58K
CapitalizationN/A
FUTURE METALS NL
Price$0.02
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$85K
CapitalizationN/A
ESGLF vs FMELF Comparison Chart
Loading...
ESGLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
ESGLF vs. FMELF commentary
Dec 19, 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 ESGLF is a Sell and FMELF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (ESGLF: $0.04 vs. FMELF: $0.02)
Brand notoriety: ESGLF and FMELF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: ESGLF: 225% vs. FMELF: 95%
Market capitalization -- ESGLF: $25.07M vs. FMELF: $8.53M
ESGLF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $25.07M. FMELF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $8.53M. 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).

ESGLF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileFMELF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

ESGLF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • ESGLF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.

Price Growth

ESGLF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -10.71% price change this week, while FMELF (@Precious Metals) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -4.40%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.36%, and the average quarterly price growth was +2.95%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-4.40% 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
ESGLF($25.1M) has a higher market cap than FMELF($8.53M). ESGLF YTD gains are higher at: -73.958 vs. FMELF (-94.286). ESGLF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -4.72M vs. FMELF (-6.65M).
ESGLFFMELFESGLF / FMELF
Capitalization25.1M8.53M294%
EBITDA-4.72M-6.65M71%
Gain YTD-73.958-94.28678%
P/E Ratio2.37N/A-
Revenue0N/A-
Total Cash1.43MN/A-
Total Debt1.48MN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
ESGLF: Fundamental Ratings
ESGLF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
24
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
76
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
92
SMR RATING
1..100
99
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
58
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
71
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
ESGLFFMELF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
77%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
59%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
70%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
68%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
15%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
31%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
18%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
78%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
63%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
ESGLF
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 %
UDN17.65-0.22
-1.23%
Invesco DB US Dollar Bearish
RWL98.08-2.35
-2.34%
Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF
GTEK32.71-1.24
-3.64%
Goldman Sachs Future Tech Leaders Eq ETF
EFO41.63-2.03
-4.65%
ProShares Ultra MSCI EAFE
QQH67.97-3.65
-5.10%
HCM Defender 100 Index ETF

ESGLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that ESGLF and CCHI have been poorly correlated (+27% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that ESGLF and CCHI's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To ESGLF
1D Price
Change %
ESGLF100%
N/A
CCHI - ESGLF
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HWAUF - ESGLF
20%
Poorly correlated
-4.01%
GRYCF - ESGLF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
TRX - ESGLF
20%
Poorly correlated
-4.89%
DC - ESGLF
14%
Poorly correlated
-6.73%
More

FMELF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that FMELF and BTUMF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FMELF and BTUMF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FMELF
1D Price
Change %
FMELF100%
N/A
BTUMF - FMELF
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
ACRG - FMELF
14%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FSTTF - FMELF
10%
Poorly correlated
+7.38%
VMSSF - FMELF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
ESGLF - FMELF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More