Ad is loading...
HAMRF
Price
$0.04
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
JGLDF
Price
$0.05
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 14 closing price
Ad is loading...

HAMRF vs JGLDF

Header iconHAMRF vs JGLDF Comparison
Open Charts HAMRF vs JGLDFBanner chart's image
SILVER HAMMER MNG
Price$0.04
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$70.95K
CapitalizationN/A
JAPAN GOLD
Price$0.05
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$16K
CapitalizationN/A
HAMRF vs JGLDF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
HAMRF vs. JGLDF 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 HAMRF is a Sell and JGLDF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (HAMRF: $0.04 vs. JGLDF: $0.05)
Brand notoriety: HAMRF and JGLDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: HAMRF: 69% vs. JGLDF: 87%
Market capitalization -- HAMRF: $8.81M vs. JGLDF: $27.1M
HAMRF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $8.81M. JGLDF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $27.1M. 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).

HAMRF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileJGLDF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • HAMRF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • JGLDF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, both HAMRF and JGLDF are a bad buy in the long-term.

Price Growth

HAMRF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -11.75% price change this week, while JGLDF (@Precious Metals) price change was -4.25% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -2.07%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -6.32%, and the average quarterly price growth was -1.75%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-2.07% 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
JGLDF($27.1M) has a higher market cap than HAMRF($8.81M). JGLDF YTD gains are higher at: -27.119 vs. HAMRF (-70.085). HAMRF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -2.02M vs. JGLDF (-3.87M). JGLDF has more cash in the bank: 428K vs. HAMRF (376K). JGLDF has less debt than HAMRF: JGLDF (0) vs HAMRF (22K). HAMRF (0) and JGLDF (0) have equivalent revenues.
HAMRFJGLDFHAMRF / JGLDF
Capitalization8.81M27.1M33%
EBITDA-2.02M-3.87M52%
Gain YTD-70.085-27.119258%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash376K428K88%
Total Debt22K0-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
JGLDF: Fundamental Ratings
JGLDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
31
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
90
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
58
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
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SH42.890.58
+1.37%
ProShares Short S&P500
DEED20.770.02
+0.08%
First Trust TCW Securitized Plus ETF
TBX29.74-0.01
-0.03%
ProShares Short 7-10 Year Treasury
RXI177.78-0.60
-0.34%
iShares Global Consumer Discr ETF
DFUS63.86-0.86
-1.33%
Dimensional US Equity Market ETF

HAMRF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that HAMRF and JGLDF have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that HAMRF and JGLDF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HAMRF
1D Price
Change %
HAMRF100%
+0.86%
JGLDF - HAMRF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CRNLF - HAMRF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
AUST - HAMRF
14%
Poorly correlated
-5.62%
SBUM - HAMRF
12%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MPVDF - HAMRF
11%
Poorly correlated
-2.95%
More

JGLDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that JGLDF and HAMRF have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that JGLDF and HAMRF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To JGLDF
1D Price
Change %
JGLDF100%
N/A
HAMRF - JGLDF
22%
Poorly correlated
+0.86%
CELTF - JGLDF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JUPGF - JGLDF
10%
Poorly correlated
N/A
KLSVF - JGLDF
-2%
Poorly correlated
+18.18%
JAGGF - JGLDF
-3%
Poorly correlated
+3.26%
More