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).
LITM’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileNWCCF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
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.
LITM’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while NWCCF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).
LITM (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а +396.07% price change this week, while NWCCF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was +3.73% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was -3.05%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -4.61%, and the average quarterly price growth was -3.34%.
The category includes companies that explore for, mine and extract metals, such as copper, diamonds, nickel, cobalt ore, lead, zinc and uranium. BHP, Rio Tinto and Southern Copper Corporation are major players in this space.
LITM | NWCCF | LITM / NWCCF | |
Capitalization | 20.3M | 25.8M | 79% |
EBITDA | -2.56M | -655.21K | 391% |
Gain YTD | -29.957 | -9.147 | 327% |
P/E Ratio | N/A | N/A | - |
Revenue | 0 | 0 | - |
Total Cash | 30.8M | 3.76M | 820% |
Total Debt | 782K | 112K | 698% |
NWCCF | ||
---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 5 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 97 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 91 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 62 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 15 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/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.
LITM | NWCCF | |
---|---|---|
RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago82% | 2 days ago75% |
Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago81% | 2 days ago72% |
Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago75% | 2 days ago77% |
MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago79% | 2 days ago71% |
TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago82% | 2 days ago66% |
TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago79% | 2 days ago67% |
Advances ODDS (%) | 2 days ago80% | 23 days ago57% |
Declines ODDS (%) | 8 days ago90% | N/A |
BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago86% | 7 days ago81% |
Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago90% | 2 days ago82% |
1 Day | |||
---|---|---|---|
ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
FXP | 18.70 | 0.72 | +4.00% |
ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 | |||
ISVL | 33.64 | -0.67 | -1.95% |
iShares Intl Dev Sm Cp Val Fctr ETF | |||
UAE | 16.03 | -0.34 | -2.08% |
iShares MSCI UAE ETF | |||
SSUS | 42.26 | -1.27 | -2.92% |
Day Hagan/Ned Davis Rsrch Smrt Sect ETF | |||
BBAX | 49.02 | -1.51 | -2.99% |
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Dev APAC ex-JpnETF |
A.I.dvisor tells us that LITM and GRFX have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LITM and GRFX's prices will move in lockstep.
Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LITM | 1D Price Change % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
LITM | 100% | +347.81% | ||
GRFX - LITM | 30% Poorly correlated | +45.50% | ||
CASXF - LITM | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
ERO - LITM | 24% Poorly correlated | -4.40% | ||
SCCO - LITM | 24% Poorly correlated | -3.91% | ||
GSM - LITM | 23% Poorly correlated | -4.48% | ||
More |
A.I.dvisor tells us that NWCCF and LITM have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that NWCCF and LITM's prices will move in lockstep.
Ticker / NAME | Correlation To NWCCF | 1D Price Change % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
NWCCF | 100% | N/A | ||
LITM - NWCCF | 23% Poorly correlated | +347.81% | ||
CHXMF - NWCCF | 20% Poorly correlated | -1.84% | ||
SAGGF - NWCCF | 15% Poorly correlated | -6.67% | ||
SLVDF - NWCCF | 13% Poorly correlated | +0.50% | ||
LTSRF - NWCCF | 12% Poorly correlated | -1.68% | ||
More |