GRCAF
Price
$0.05
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 18 closing price
GSMGF
Price
$0.03
Change
-$0.03 (-50.00%)
Updated
Oct 29 closing price
Ad is loading...

GRCAF vs GSMGF

Header iconGRCAF vs GSMGF Comparison
Open Charts GRCAF vs GSMGFBanner chart's image
GOLD SPRINGS RESOURCE
Price$0.05
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$45.83K
CapitalizationN/A
Indiana Res
Price$0.03
Change-$0.03 (-50.00%)
Volume$355
CapitalizationN/A
GRCAF vs GSMGF Comparison Chart
Loading...
GRCAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GSMGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GRCAF vs. GSMGF 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 GRCAF is a Hold and GSMGF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (GRCAF: $0.05 vs. GSMGF: $0.03)
Brand notoriety: GRCAF and GSMGF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GRCAF: 200% vs. GSMGF: 46%
Market capitalization -- GRCAF: $17.76M vs. GSMGF: $22.48M
GRCAF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $17.76M. GSMGF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $22.48M. 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).

GRCAF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGSMGF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

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

  • GRCAF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • GSMGF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 0 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, GSMGF is a better buy in the short-term than GRCAF.

Price Growth

GRCAF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -18.04% price change this week, while GSMGF (@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 -5.24%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.88%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.01%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-5.24% 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
GSMGF($22.5M) has a higher market cap than GRCAF($17.8M). GRCAF YTD gains are higher at: -14.416 vs. GSMGF (-31.486). GRCAF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -1.07M vs. GSMGF (-1.42M). GRCAF has more cash in the bank: 538K vs. GSMGF (504K). GRCAF has less debt than GSMGF: GRCAF (29.6K) vs GSMGF (315K). GSMGF has higher revenues than GRCAF: GSMGF (212M) vs GRCAF (0).
GRCAFGSMGFGRCAF / GSMGF
Capitalization17.8M22.5M79%
EBITDA-1.07M-1.42M75%
Gain YTD-14.416-31.48646%
P/E Ratio18.59N/A-
Revenue0212M-
Total Cash538K504K107%
Total Debt29.6K315K9%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GRCAF vs GSMGF: Fundamental Ratings
GRCAF
GSMGF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8525
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
66
Overvalued
54
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10076
SMR RATING
1..100
9098
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8641
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
95100
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.

GSMGF's Valuation (54) in the null industry is in the same range as GRCAF (66). This means that GSMGF’s stock grew similarly to GRCAF’s over the last 12 months.

GSMGF's Profit vs Risk Rating (76) in the null industry is in the same range as GRCAF (100). This means that GSMGF’s stock grew similarly to GRCAF’s over the last 12 months.

GRCAF's SMR Rating (90) in the null industry is in the same range as GSMGF (98). This means that GRCAF’s stock grew similarly to GSMGF’s over the last 12 months.

GSMGF's Price Growth Rating (41) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GRCAF (86). This means that GSMGF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GRCAF’s over the last 12 months.

GRCAF's P/E Growth Rating (95) in the null industry is in the same range as GSMGF (100). This means that GRCAF’s stock grew similarly to GSMGF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GRCAFGSMGF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
88%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
25%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
20%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
31%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
27%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 24 days ago
69%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
84%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
72%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
83%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
GRCAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GSMGF
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 %
UCON24.670.01
+0.04%
First Trust TCW Unconstrained Pls Bd ETF
LQIG95.41-0.07
-0.07%
SPDR MarketAxess Inv Grd 400 Corp Bd ETF
THNQ51.51-0.07
-0.13%
Robo Global® Artificial Intelligence ETF
AVES47.37-0.14
-0.29%
Avantis Emerging Markets Value ETF
ULE10.73-0.03
-0.30%
ProShares Ultra Euro

GRCAF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GRCAF and GMINF have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GRCAF and GMINF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GRCAF
1D Price
Change %
GRCAF100%
N/A
GMINF - GRCAF
28%
Poorly correlated
-0.41%
PNGZF - GRCAF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RMLFF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
-0.80%
LVGLF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
XPRCF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

GSMGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GSMGF has been loosely correlated with SRBIF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 44% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GSMGF jumps, then SRBIF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GSMGF
1D Price
Change %
GSMGF100%
N/A
SRBIF - GSMGF
44%
Loosely correlated
N/A
GMDMF - GSMGF
40%
Loosely correlated
N/A
SLRRF - GSMGF
35%
Loosely correlated
N/A
TRGGF - GSMGF
23%
Poorly correlated
-22.79%
GRCAF - GSMGF
10%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More