GSMGF
Price
$0.03
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 31 closing price
Capitalization
22.48M
HCHDF
Price
$2.30
Change
-$0.11 (-4.56%)
Updated
Feb 21 closing price
Capitalization
510.46M
17 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

GSMGF vs HCHDF

Header iconGSMGF vs HCHDF Comparison
Open Charts GSMGF vs HCHDFBanner chart's image
Indiana Res
Price$0.03
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$555
Capitalization22.48M
Hochschild Mining
Price$2.30
Change-$0.11 (-4.56%)
Volume$9.33K
Capitalization510.46M
GSMGF vs HCHDF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GSMGF vs. HCHDF commentary
Feb 23, 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 GSMGF is a Hold and HCHDF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Feb 23, 2025
Stock price -- (GSMGF: $0.03 vs. HCHDF: $2.30)
Brand notoriety: GSMGF and HCHDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GSMGF: 107% vs. HCHDF: 22%
Market capitalization -- GSMGF: $22.48M vs. HCHDF: $510.46M
GSMGF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $22.48M. HCHDF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $510.46M. 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 $1.08B.

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).

GSMGF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileHCHDF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

GSMGF (@Precious Metals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while HCHDF (@Precious Metals) price change was -6.12% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +4.88%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +15.99%, and the average quarterly price growth was +18.98%.

Reported Earning Dates

HCHDF is expected to report earnings on Apr 29, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+4.88% 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
HCHDF($510M) has a higher market cap than GSMGF($22.5M). GSMGF YTD gains are higher at: 0.000 vs. HCHDF (-10.506). HCHDF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 214M vs. GSMGF (-1.42M). HCHDF has more cash in the bank: 204M vs. GSMGF (504K). GSMGF has less debt than HCHDF: GSMGF (315K) vs HCHDF (314M). HCHDF has higher revenues than GSMGF: HCHDF (764M) vs GSMGF (212M).
GSMGFHCHDFGSMGF / HCHDF
Capitalization22.5M510M4%
EBITDA-1.42M214M-1%
Gain YTD0.000-10.506-
P/E RatioN/A99.01-
Revenue212M764M28%
Total Cash504K204M0%
Total Debt315K314M0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GSMGF vs HCHDF: Fundamental Ratings
GSMGF
HCHDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
57
Fair valued
12
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
7681
SMR RATING
1..100
9886
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
6347
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
10052
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.

HCHDF's Valuation (12) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GSMGF (57). This means that HCHDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GSMGF’s over the last 12 months.

GSMGF's Profit vs Risk Rating (76) in the null industry is in the same range as HCHDF (81). This means that GSMGF’s stock grew similarly to HCHDF’s over the last 12 months.

HCHDF's SMR Rating (86) in the null industry is in the same range as GSMGF (98). This means that HCHDF’s stock grew similarly to GSMGF’s over the last 12 months.

HCHDF's Price Growth Rating (47) in the null industry is in the same range as GSMGF (63). This means that HCHDF’s stock grew similarly to GSMGF’s over the last 12 months.

HCHDF's P/E Growth Rating (52) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GSMGF (100). This means that HCHDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GSMGF’s over the last 12 months.

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
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
CVEO27.310.35
+1.30%
Civeo Corp
HOWL1.38N/A
N/A
Werewolf Therapeutics
IBN28.16-0.44
-1.54%
ICICI Bank Limited
VTMX24.46-0.42
-1.69%
Corporacion Inmobiliaria Vesta SAB de CV
RES5.91-0.19
-3.11%
RPC

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
GRCAF - GSMGF
10%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HBEIF - GSMGF
6%
Poorly correlated
-6.28%
HCHDF - GSMGF
5%
Poorly correlated
-4.56%
More

HCHDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, HCHDF has been loosely correlated with HMY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 41% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if HCHDF jumps, then HMY could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HCHDF
1D Price
Change %
HCHDF100%
-4.56%
HMY - HCHDF
41%
Loosely correlated
-7.68%
AU - HCHDF
40%
Loosely correlated
-1.19%
DRD - HCHDF
40%
Loosely correlated
-4.90%
GFI - HCHDF
39%
Loosely correlated
-2.60%
GOLD - HCHDF
38%
Loosely correlated
-2.76%
More