LCKYF
Price
$0.07
Change
+$0.02 (+40.00%)
Updated
Dec 13 closing price
Capitalization
2M
SICNF
Price
$0.03
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
14.69M
Ad is loading...

LCKYF vs SICNF

Header iconLCKYF vs SICNF Comparison
Open Charts LCKYF vs SICNFBanner chart's image
GOLDEN SKY MINERALS
Price$0.07
Change+$0.02 (+40.00%)
Volume$23.1K
Capitalization2M
Sokoman Minerals
Price$0.03
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$50.05K
Capitalization14.69M
LCKYF vs SICNF Comparison Chart
Loading...
SICNF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
LCKYF vs. SICNF 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 LCKYF is a Hold and SICNF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (LCKYF: $0.07 vs. SICNF: $0.03)
Brand notoriety: LCKYF and SICNF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: LCKYF: 177% vs. SICNF: 110%
Market capitalization -- LCKYF: $2M vs. SICNF: $14.69M
LCKYF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $2M. SICNF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $14.69M. 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).

LCKYF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSICNF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

SICNF’s TA Score shows that 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • SICNF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 6 bearish.

Price Growth

LCKYF (@Precious Metals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SICNF (@Precious Metals) price change was +0.20% 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
SICNF($14.7M) has a higher market cap than LCKYF($2M). SICNF YTD gains are higher at: 10.088 vs. LCKYF (0.000). LCKYF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -968.35K vs. SICNF (-11.71M). SICNF has more cash in the bank: 6.1M vs. LCKYF (1.43M). LCKYF (0) and SICNF (0) have equivalent revenues.
LCKYFSICNFLCKYF / SICNF
Capitalization2M14.7M14%
EBITDA-968.35K-11.71M8%
Gain YTD0.00010.088-
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash1.43M6.1M23%
Total DebtN/AN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
LCKYF vs SICNF: Fundamental Ratings
LCKYF
SICNF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
29
Undervalued
62
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
9895
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8188
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
10045
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
45n/a

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.

LCKYF's Valuation (29) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SICNF (62). This means that LCKYF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SICNF’s over the last 12 months.

LCKYF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as SICNF (100). This means that LCKYF’s stock grew similarly to SICNF’s over the last 12 months.

SICNF's SMR Rating (95) in the null industry is in the same range as LCKYF (98). This means that SICNF’s stock grew similarly to LCKYF’s over the last 12 months.

LCKYF's Price Growth Rating (81) in the null industry is in the same range as SICNF (88). This means that LCKYF’s stock grew similarly to SICNF’s over the last 12 months.

SICNF's P/E Growth Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LCKYF (100). This means that SICNF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LCKYF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
LCKYFSICNF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
87%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
82%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
89%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
48%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
85%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
40%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
88%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 17 days ago
86%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 13 days ago
86%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
SICNF
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 %
CTHCX75.011.12
+1.52%
Columbia Global Technology Growth C
JIJRX13.570.09
+0.67%
JHancock International Dynamic Gr R6
CNPEX61.390.39
+0.64%
American Funds New Perspective 529E
LFSFX30.460.18
+0.59%
Lord Abbett Focused Small Cap Value F
LIRTX7.980.02
+0.25%
Lord Abbett International Value R5

LCKYF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, LCKYF has been loosely correlated with VITFF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 42% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if LCKYF jumps, then VITFF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LCKYF
1D Price
Change %
LCKYF100%
N/A
VITFF - LCKYF
42%
Loosely correlated
N/A
VLMZF - LCKYF
38%
Loosely correlated
N/A
SVGAF - LCKYF
37%
Loosely correlated
+253.33%
GORIF - LCKYF
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SICNF - LCKYF
28%
Poorly correlated
-10.04%
More

SICNF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SICNF and LCKYF have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SICNF and LCKYF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SICNF
1D Price
Change %
SICNF100%
-10.04%
LCKYF - SICNF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RJKAF - SICNF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
AUMBF - SICNF
22%
Poorly correlated
+5.01%
GALKF - SICNF
20%
Poorly correlated
-4.32%
SILS - SICNF
14%
Poorly correlated
-17.23%
More