GGLDF
Price
$0.14
Change
-$0.01 (-6.67%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
19.24M
MGMLF
Price
$0.04
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
33.26M
Ad is loading...

GGLDF vs MGMLF

Header iconGGLDF vs MGMLF Comparison
Open Charts GGLDF vs MGMLFBanner chart's image
Getchell Gold
Price$0.14
Change-$0.01 (-6.67%)
Volume$350.21K
Capitalization19.24M
Maple Gold Mines
Price$0.04
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$29.49K
Capitalization33.26M
GGLDF vs MGMLF Comparison Chart
Loading...
GGLDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MGMLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GGLDF vs. MGMLF 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 GGLDF is a Hold and MGMLF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (GGLDF: $0.14 vs. MGMLF: $0.04)
Brand notoriety: GGLDF and MGMLF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GGLDF: 379% vs. MGMLF: 19%
Market capitalization -- GGLDF: $19.24M vs. MGMLF: $33.26M
GGLDF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $19.24M. MGMLF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $33.26M. 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).

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

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

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.

GGLDF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MGMLF’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • GGLDF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • MGMLF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, GGLDF is a better buy in the short-term than MGMLF.

Price Growth

GGLDF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +26.09% price change this week, while MGMLF (@Precious Metals) price change was -1.91% 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
MGMLF($33.3M) has a higher market cap than GGLDF($19.2M). GGLDF YTD gains are higher at: 42.256 vs. MGMLF (-3.614). GGLDF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -6.98M vs. MGMLF (-10.27M). MGMLF has more cash in the bank: 8.54M vs. GGLDF (841K). GGLDF has less debt than MGMLF: GGLDF (90K) vs MGMLF (440K). GGLDF (0) and MGMLF (0) have equivalent revenues.
GGLDFMGMLFGGLDF / MGMLF
Capitalization19.2M33.3M58%
EBITDA-6.98M-10.27M68%
Gain YTD42.256-3.614-1,169%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash841K8.54M10%
Total Debt90K440K20%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GGLDF vs MGMLF: Fundamental Ratings
GGLDF
MGMLF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
181
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
89
Overvalued
87
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
86100
SMR RATING
1..100
10098
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3763
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100100
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.

MGMLF's Valuation (87) in the null industry is in the same range as GGLDF (89). This means that MGMLF’s stock grew similarly to GGLDF’s over the last 12 months.

GGLDF's Profit vs Risk Rating (86) in the null industry is in the same range as MGMLF (100). This means that GGLDF’s stock grew similarly to MGMLF’s over the last 12 months.

MGMLF's SMR Rating (98) in the null industry is in the same range as GGLDF (100). This means that MGMLF’s stock grew similarly to GGLDF’s over the last 12 months.

GGLDF's Price Growth Rating (37) in the null industry is in the same range as MGMLF (63). This means that GGLDF’s stock grew similarly to MGMLF’s over the last 12 months.

GGLDF's P/E Growth Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as MGMLF (100). This means that GGLDF’s stock grew similarly to MGMLF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GGLDFMGMLF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
86%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
81%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
78%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
82%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
76%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 16 days ago
74%
Bullish Trend 16 days ago
81%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 20 days ago
90%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
89%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
85%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
GGLDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MGMLF
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 %
VTSMX144.161.34
+0.94%
Vanguard Total Stock Mkt Idx Inv
IAXAX8.950.06
+0.67%
VY® T. Rowe Price Divers Mid Cap Gr A
RMBGX35.590.20
+0.57%
RMB I
GRHIX13.22N/A
N/A
Goehring & Rozencwajg Resources Instl
BARAX93.29-0.08
-0.09%
Baron Asset Retail

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%
-4.74%
CALRF - GGLDF
36%
Loosely correlated
N/A
GAU - GGLDF
32%
Poorly correlated
-2.68%
THM - GGLDF
29%
Poorly correlated
+5.73%
PAAS - GGLDF
28%
Poorly correlated
-0.09%
KGC - GGLDF
27%
Poorly correlated
+0.78%
More

MGMLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MGMLF and GSISF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MGMLF and GSISF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MGMLF
1D Price
Change %
MGMLF100%
-6.74%
GSISF - MGMLF
24%
Poorly correlated
-4.17%
APRAF - MGMLF
23%
Poorly correlated
-5.60%
GGLDF - MGMLF
22%
Poorly correlated
-4.74%
JNCCF - MGMLF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WRLGF - MGMLF
21%
Poorly correlated
+0.22%
More