Ad is loading...
GMTNF
Price
$0.03
Change
-$0.01 (-25.00%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
HELOF
Price
$0.13
Change
+$0.01 (+8.33%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
Ad is loading...

GMTNF vs HELOF

Header iconGMTNF vs HELOF Comparison
Open Charts GMTNF vs HELOFBanner chart's image
Gold Mountain Mining
Price$0.03
Change-$0.01 (-25.00%)
Volume$12.85K
CapitalizationN/A
WINSHEAR GOLD
Price$0.13
Change+$0.01 (+8.33%)
Volume$21K
CapitalizationN/A
GMTNF vs HELOF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GMTNF vs. HELOF 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 GMTNF is a Hold and HELOF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (GMTNF: $0.03 vs. HELOF: $0.13)
Brand notoriety: GMTNF and HELOF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GMTNF: 29% vs. HELOF: 276%
Market capitalization -- GMTNF: $8.31M vs. HELOF: $3.34M
GMTNF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $8.31M. HELOF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $3.34M. 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).

GMTNF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileHELOF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

GMTNF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +1.49% price change this week, while HELOF (@Precious Metals) price change was +1.80% 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
GMTNF($8.31M) has a higher market cap than HELOF($3.34M). GMTNF YTD gains are higher at: -20.973 vs. HELOF (-78.452). HELOF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -1.15M vs. GMTNF (-2.53M). GMTNF has more cash in the bank: 2.91M vs. HELOF (588K). GMTNF has higher revenues than HELOF: GMTNF (11.4M) vs HELOF (0).
GMTNFHELOFGMTNF / HELOF
Capitalization8.31M3.34M248%
EBITDA-2.53M-1.15M220%
Gain YTD-20.973-78.45227%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue11.4M0-
Total Cash2.91M588K495%
Total Debt3.52MN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
HELOF: Fundamental Ratings
HELOF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
45
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
99
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
39
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
14
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50

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
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
NBHAX14.39-0.05
-0.35%
Neuberger Berman Equity Income A
CBFEX38.10-0.22
-0.57%
American Funds Global Balanced 529E
VELAX17.79-0.14
-0.78%
VELA Large Cap Plus A
MGOYX14.69-0.22
-1.48%
Victory Munder Mid-Cap Core Growth Y
CHCCX4.17-0.09
-2.11%
AB Discovery Growth C

GMTNF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GMTNF and EREPF have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GMTNF and EREPF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GMTNF
1D Price
Change %
GMTNF100%
-6.06%
EREPF - GMTNF
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RBTK - GMTNF
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HELOF - GMTNF
25%
Poorly correlated
+8.70%
SRCRF - GMTNF
21%
Poorly correlated
+5.60%
STNRF - GMTNF
13%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

HELOF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, HELOF has been loosely correlated with KGSSF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 46% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if HELOF jumps, then KGSSF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HELOF
1D Price
Change %
HELOF100%
+8.70%
KGSSF - HELOF
46%
Loosely correlated
N/A
RMETF - HELOF
39%
Loosely correlated
N/A
KGLDF - HELOF
26%
Poorly correlated
-10.00%
GMTNF - HELOF
25%
Poorly correlated
-6.06%
JUPGF - HELOF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More