Ad is loading...
GSISF
Price
$1.45
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 4 closing price
MGMLF
Price
$0.04
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
Ad is loading...

GSISF vs MGMLF

Header iconGSISF vs MGMLF Comparison
Open Charts GSISF vs MGMLFBanner chart's image
Genesis Minerals
Price$1.45
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$4.02K
CapitalizationN/A
Maple Gold Mines
Price$0.04
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$235K
CapitalizationN/A
GSISF vs MGMLF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GSISF vs. MGMLF 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 GSISF is a Hold and MGMLF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (GSISF: $1.45 vs. MGMLF: $0.04)
Brand notoriety: GSISF and MGMLF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GSISF: 225% vs. MGMLF: 155%
Market capitalization -- GSISF: $1.02B vs. MGMLF: $33.26M
GSISF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $1.02B. MGMLF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $33.26M. 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).

GSISF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileMGMLF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

GSISF (@Precious Metals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MGMLF (@Precious Metals) price change was -22.27% 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
GSISF($1.02B) has a higher market cap than MGMLF($33.3M). GSISF YTD gains are higher at: 20.833 vs. MGMLF (-28.190). MGMLF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -10.27M vs. GSISF (-40.57M). GSISF has more cash in the bank: 11.1M vs. MGMLF (8.54M). GSISF has higher revenues than MGMLF: GSISF (11M) vs MGMLF (0).
GSISFMGMLFGSISF / MGMLF
Capitalization1.02B33.3M3,057%
EBITDA-40.57M-10.27M395%
Gain YTD20.833-28.190-74%
P/E Ratio0.99N/A-
Revenue11M0-
Total Cash11.1M8.54M130%
Total DebtN/A440K-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
MGMLF: Fundamental Ratings
MGMLF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
85
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
97
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
65
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100
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 %
ESPNX46.14-0.46
-0.99%
Allspring Special Small Cap Value Inst
PAHTX7.68-0.09
-1.16%
PGIM Jennison NextGeneration Glb Opps C
FADIX26.18-0.34
-1.28%
Fidelity Advisor Diversified Intl M
FWOEX17.11-0.23
-1.33%
Fidelity Advisor Women's Leadership M
DTCCX15.67-0.23
-1.45%
BNY Mellon Sust US Equity C

GSISF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GSISF has been loosely correlated with DTARF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GSISF jumps, then DTARF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GSISF
1D Price
Change %
GSISF100%
N/A
DTARF - GSISF
36%
Loosely correlated
-2.45%
PDLMF - GSISF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
STBMF - GSISF
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WHGOF - GSISF
30%
Poorly correlated
-7.98%
VMSSF - GSISF
26%
Poorly correlated
+22.20%
More

MGMLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MGMLF and GSISF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MGMLF and GSISF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MGMLF
1D Price
Change %
MGMLF100%
-14.03%
GSISF - MGMLF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
APRAF - MGMLF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GGLDF - MGMLF
22%
Poorly correlated
-9.96%
JNCCF - MGMLF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WRLGF - MGMLF
21%
Poorly correlated
-2.25%
More