GLGDF
Price
$1.21
Change
-$0.03 (-2.42%)
Updated
Mar 31 closing price
Capitalization
298.17M
35 days until earnings call
HL
Price
$5.48
Change
-$0.08 (-1.44%)
Updated
Apr 1, 04:59 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
3.01B
35 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

GLGDF vs HL

Header iconGLGDF vs HL Comparison
Open Charts GLGDF vs HLBanner chart's image
GoGold Resources
Price$1.21
Change-$0.03 (-2.42%)
Volume$260.07K
Capitalization298.17M
Hecla Mining
Price$5.48
Change-$0.08 (-1.44%)
Volume$108.25K
Capitalization3.01B
GLGDF vs HL Comparison Chart
Loading...
GLGDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
HL
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GLGDF vs. HL commentary
Apr 02, 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 GLGDF is a Hold and HL is a StrongBuy.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Apr 02, 2025
Stock price -- (GLGDF: $1.21 vs. HL: $5.56)
Brand notoriety: GLGDF: Not notable vs. HL: Notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GLGDF: 139% vs. HL: 96%
Market capitalization -- GLGDF: $298.17M vs. HL: $3.01B
GLGDF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $298.17M. HL’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $3.01B. 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 $1.11B.

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).

GLGDF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileHL’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

GLGDF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while HL’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • GLGDF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
  • HL’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, HL is a better buy in the short-term than GLGDF.

Price Growth

GLGDF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -3.05% price change this week, while HL (@Precious Metals) price change was -5.28% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +1.63%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +10.24%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.91%.

Reported Earning Dates

GLGDF is expected to report earnings on May 07, 2025.

HL is expected to report earnings on May 07, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+1.63% 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
HL($3.01B) has a higher market cap than GLGDF($298M). HL has higher P/E ratio than GLGDF: HL (1111.11) vs GLGDF (769.23). GLGDF YTD gains are higher at: 57.778 vs. HL (13.317). HL has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 124M vs. GLGDF (-3.76M). HL has more cash in the bank: 106M vs. GLGDF (88.8M). GLGDF has less debt than HL: GLGDF (778K) vs HL (663M). HL has higher revenues than GLGDF: HL (720M) vs GLGDF (28.6M).
GLGDFHLGLGDF / HL
Capitalization298M3.01B10%
EBITDA-3.76M124M-3%
Gain YTD57.77813.317434%
P/E Ratio769.231111.1169%
Revenue28.6M720M4%
Total Cash88.8M106M84%
Total Debt778K663M0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GLGDF vs HL: Fundamental Ratings
GLGDF
HL
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
6976
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
93
Overvalued
64
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
6957
SMR RATING
1..100
9088
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3746
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
742
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a48

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.

HL's Valuation (64) in the Precious Metals industry is in the same range as GLGDF (93) in the null industry. This means that HL’s stock grew similarly to GLGDF’s over the last 12 months.

HL's Profit vs Risk Rating (57) in the Precious Metals industry is in the same range as GLGDF (69) in the null industry. This means that HL’s stock grew similarly to GLGDF’s over the last 12 months.

HL's SMR Rating (88) in the Precious Metals industry is in the same range as GLGDF (90) in the null industry. This means that HL’s stock grew similarly to GLGDF’s over the last 12 months.

GLGDF's Price Growth Rating (37) in the null industry is in the same range as HL (46) in the Precious Metals industry. This means that GLGDF’s stock grew similarly to HL’s over the last 12 months.

GLGDF's P/E Growth Rating (7) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HL (42) in the Precious Metals industry. This means that GLGDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than HL’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GLGDFHL
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
83%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
86%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
83%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
85%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
81%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
73%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
82%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
81%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 16 days ago
82%
Bullish Trend 20 days ago
81%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
80%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
77%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
GLGDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
HL
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
LIN465.646.53
+1.42%
Linde plc
UFPI107.040.73
+0.69%
UFP Industries
INMD17.740.04
+0.23%
InMode Ltd
GCMG13.23-0.02
-0.15%
GCM Grosvenor
VANI1.05-0.06
-5.41%
Vivani Medical

GLGDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GLGDF has been loosely correlated with PAAS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 61% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GLGDF jumps, then PAAS could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GLGDF
1D Price
Change %
GLGDF100%
-2.74%
PAAS - GLGDF
61%
Loosely correlated
-0.39%
MAG - GLGDF
59%
Loosely correlated
-2.68%
HL - GLGDF
59%
Loosely correlated
-1.94%
AYASF - GLGDF
57%
Loosely correlated
+2.20%
SILV - GLGDF
57%
Loosely correlated
N/A
More

HL and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, HL has been closely correlated with FSM. These tickers have moved in lockstep 84% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if HL jumps, then FSM could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HL
1D Price
Change %
HL100%
-1.94%
FSM - HL
84%
Closely correlated
-0.33%
CDE - HL
83%
Closely correlated
-2.79%
PAAS - HL
83%
Closely correlated
-0.39%
MAG - HL
80%
Closely correlated
-2.68%
AG - HL
79%
Closely correlated
-1.04%
More