Ad is loading...
GRCAF
Price
$0.06
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 12 closing price
XPRCF
Price
$0.06
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Apr 9 closing price
Ad is loading...

GRCAF vs XPRCF

Header iconGRCAF vs XPRCF Comparison
Open Charts GRCAF vs XPRCFBanner chart's image
GOLD SPRINGS RESOURCE
Price$0.06
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$86K
CapitalizationN/A
XPLORE RES
Price$0.06
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$400
CapitalizationN/A
GRCAF vs XPRCF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GRCAF vs. XPRCF 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 GRCAF is a Hold and XPRCF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (GRCAF: $0.06 vs. XPRCF: $0.06)
Brand notoriety: GRCAF and XPRCF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GRCAF: 483% vs. XPRCF: 100%
Market capitalization -- GRCAF: $17.76M vs. XPRCF: $1.04M
GRCAF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $17.76M. XPRCF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $1.04M. 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 whileXPRCF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

GRCAF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -7.86% price change this week, while XPRCF (@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 -5.50%. 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
GRCAF($17.8M) has a higher market cap than XPRCF($1.04M). XPRCF YTD gains are higher at: 100.000 vs. GRCAF (1.735). XPRCF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -196.44K vs. GRCAF (-1.07M). GRCAF has more cash in the bank: 538K vs. XPRCF (88.6K). GRCAF (0) and XPRCF (0) have equivalent revenues.
GRCAFXPRCFGRCAF / XPRCF
Capitalization17.8M1.04M1,720%
EBITDA-1.07M-196.44K543%
Gain YTD1.735100.0002%
P/E Ratio18.59N/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash538K88.6K607%
Total Debt29.6KN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GRCAF: Fundamental Ratings
GRCAF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
68
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
88
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
60
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
95
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
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
IBDR24.070.03
+0.12%
iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Corp ETF
PSDM50.840.03
+0.05%
PGIM Short Duration Mlt-Sect Bd ETF
DIVD32.74-0.11
-0.34%
Altrius Global Dividend ETF
BUFF44.66-0.24
-0.53%
Innovator Laddered Allc Pwr Bfr ETF™
UJUL34.34-0.22
-0.65%
Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra BffrETF™-Jul

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
+1.29%
PNGZF - GRCAF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RMLFF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
-1.86%
LVGLF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
XPRCF - GRCAF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

XPRCF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, XPRCF has been loosely correlated with WKGFF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 65% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if XPRCF jumps, then WKGFF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To XPRCF
1D Price
Change %
XPRCF100%
N/A
WKGFF - XPRCF
65%
Loosely correlated
N/A
KGSSF - XPRCF
35%
Loosely correlated
N/A
AUMN - XPRCF
26%
Poorly correlated
-9.33%
MXROF - XPRCF
25%
Poorly correlated
+12.09%
SITKF - XPRCF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More