GGLDF
Price
$0.10
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Oct 4 closing price
GLBKF
Price
$0.15
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jun 20 closing price
Ad is loading...

GGLDF vs GLBKF

Header iconGGLDF vs GLBKF Comparison
Open Charts GGLDF vs GLBKFBanner chart's image
Getchell Gold
Price$0.10
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$358.46K
CapitalizationN/A
Goldbank Mining
Price$0.15
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$100
CapitalizationN/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
GGLDF vs GLBKF Comparison Chart
Loading...
VS
GGLDF vs. GLBKF commentary
Oct 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 GGLDF is a Hold and GLBKF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Oct 18, 2024
Stock price -- (GGLDF: $0.11 vs. GLBKF: $0.15)
Brand notoriety: GGLDF and GLBKF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GGLDF: 3% vs. GLBKF: 100%
Market capitalization -- GGLDF: $19.24M vs. GLBKF: $44.01M
GGLDF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $19.24M. GLBKF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $44.01M. 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 $1.02B.

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).

GGLDF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGLBKF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

GGLDF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +20.85% price change this week, while GLBKF (@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 +2.12%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +11.06%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.61%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+2.12% 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
GLBKF($44M) has a higher market cap than GGLDF($19.2M). GLBKF YTD gains are higher at: 68.778 vs. GGLDF (-4.114). GLBKF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -227.64K vs. GGLDF (-6.98M). GGLDF has more cash in the bank: 841K vs. GLBKF (370K). GGLDF has less debt than GLBKF: GGLDF (90K) vs GLBKF (228K). GGLDF (0) and GLBKF (0) have equivalent revenues.
GGLDFGLBKFGGLDF / GLBKF
Capitalization19.2M44M44%
EBITDA-6.98M-227.64K3,067%
Gain YTD-4.11468.778-6%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash841K370K227%
Total Debt90K228K39%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GLBKF: Fundamental Ratings
GLBKF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
14
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
20
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
59
SMR RATING
1..100
100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
53
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100
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
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
AAPL232.150.37
+0.16%
Apple
SPY582.350.05
+0.01%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust
TSLA220.89-0.44
-0.20%
Tesla
BTC.X67399.836000-212.882810
-0.31%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
GME21.41-0.25
-1.15%
GameStop Corp

GGLDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GGLDF has been loosely correlated with CALRF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GGLDF jumps, then CALRF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GGLDF
1D Price
Change %
GGLDF100%
+1.42%
CALRF - GGLDF
36%
Loosely correlated
N/A
GAU - GGLDF
32%
Poorly correlated
-2.76%
THM - GGLDF
26%
Poorly correlated
-6.12%
HSTXF - GGLDF
25%
Poorly correlated
+2.17%
ITRG - GGLDF
24%
Poorly correlated
+3.96%
More

GLBKF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GLBKF has been loosely correlated with STBMF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 50% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GLBKF jumps, then STBMF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GLBKF
1D Price
Change %
GLBKF100%
N/A
STBMF - GLBKF
50%
Loosely correlated
N/A
SRBIF - GLBKF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RMLRF - GLBKF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GNSMF - GLBKF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GGLDF - GLBKF
9%
Poorly correlated
+1.42%
More