GRCAF
Price
$0.04
Change
-$0.01 (-20.00%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
17.76M
RMLFF
Price
$0.49
Change
-$0.01 (-2.00%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
185.38M
Ad is loading...

GRCAF vs RMLFF

Header iconGRCAF vs RMLFF Comparison
Open Charts GRCAF vs RMLFFBanner chart's image
GOLD SPRINGS RESOURCE
Price$0.04
Change-$0.01 (-20.00%)
Volume$7K
Capitalization17.76M
Rusoro Mining
Price$0.49
Change-$0.01 (-2.00%)
Volume$10.9K
Capitalization185.38M
GRCAF vs RMLFF Comparison Chart
Loading...
GRCAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RMLFF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GRCAF vs. RMLFF 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 GRCAF is a Hold and RMLFF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (GRCAF: $0.04 vs. RMLFF: $0.49)
Brand notoriety: GRCAF and RMLFF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GRCAF: 37% vs. RMLFF: 6%
Market capitalization -- GRCAF: $17.76M vs. RMLFF: $185.38M
GRCAF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $17.76M. RMLFF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $185.38M. 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).

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

  • GRCAF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • RMLFF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, RMLFF 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 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish while RMLFF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • GRCAF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • RMLFF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, RMLFF is a better buy in the short-term than GRCAF.

Price Growth

GRCAF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -29.20% price change this week, while RMLFF (@Precious Metals) price change was -7.55% 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
RMLFF($185M) has a higher market cap than GRCAF($17.8M). RMLFF YTD gains are higher at: -14.783 vs. GRCAF (-29.852). GRCAF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -1.07M vs. RMLFF (-6.06M). GRCAF has more cash in the bank: 538K vs. RMLFF (246). GRCAF has less debt than RMLFF: GRCAF (29.6K) vs RMLFF (35.3M). GRCAF (0) and RMLFF (0) have equivalent revenues.
GRCAFRMLFFGRCAF / RMLFF
Capitalization17.8M185M10%
EBITDA-1.07M-6.06M18%
Gain YTD-29.852-14.783202%
P/E Ratio18.59N/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash538K246218,699%
Total Debt29.6K35.3M0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GRCAF vs RMLFF: Fundamental Ratings
GRCAF
RMLFF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5035
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
65
Fair valued
37
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10045
SMR RATING
1..100
91100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
9590
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9591
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a50

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.

RMLFF's Valuation (37) in the null industry is in the same range as GRCAF (65). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to GRCAF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's Profit vs Risk Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GRCAF (100). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GRCAF’s over the last 12 months.

GRCAF's SMR Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (100). This means that GRCAF’s stock grew similarly to RMLFF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's Price Growth Rating (90) in the null industry is in the same range as GRCAF (95). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to GRCAF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's P/E Growth Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as GRCAF (95). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to GRCAF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GRCAFRMLFF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
82%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
66%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
87%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
78%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
79%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
81%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 19 days ago
81%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
73%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
67%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
GRCAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RMLFF
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 %
DIEQX37.790.42
+1.12%
Domini Impact Equity Institutional
ISIPX19.850.19
+0.97%
Voya US Stock Index Port S2
IENRX9.640.08
+0.84%
Macquarie Climate Solutions R6
RLBFX35.060.22
+0.63%
American Funds American Balanced R5
LRSOX21.660.13
+0.60%
Lord Abbett Small Cap Value F3

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%
-18.36%
GMINF - GRCAF
28%
Poorly correlated
-0.84%
PNGZF - GRCAF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RMLFF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
-2.00%
LVGLF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
+7.14%
XPRCF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

RMLFF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, RMLFF has been loosely correlated with NCMBF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 33% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if RMLFF jumps, then NCMBF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RMLFF
1D Price
Change %
RMLFF100%
-2.00%
NCMBF - RMLFF
33%
Loosely correlated
N/A
ORAAF - RMLFF
29%
Poorly correlated
-1.96%
GDRZF - RMLFF
22%
Poorly correlated
+1.44%
BADEF - RMLFF
21%
Poorly correlated
+1.10%
GRCAF - RMLFF
20%
Poorly correlated
-18.36%
More