LUCMF vs TGB
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 LUCMF is a Buy and TGB is a Buy.
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).
LUCMF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileTGB’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- LUCMF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- TGB’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
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.
LUCMF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while TGB’s TA Score has 6 bullish TA indicator(s).
- LUCMF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 3 bearish.
- TGB’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
LUCMF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а +6.45% price change this week, while TGB (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was -5.58% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +1.77%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +12.81%, and the average quarterly price growth was +0.54%.
Reported Earning Dates
TGB is expected to report earnings on Feb 19, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Other Metals/Minerals (+1.77% weekly)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.
| LUCMF | TGB | LUCMF / TGB | |
| Capitalization | 49.7M | 626M | 8% |
| EBITDA | -4.28M | 125M | -3% |
| Gain YTD | 64.019 | 69.286 | 92% |
| P/E Ratio | 1.17 | 10.57 | 11% |
| Revenue | 65.1M | 472M | 14% |
| Total Cash | 3.62M | 83.5M | 4% |
| Total Debt | 43.8M | 707M | 6% |
LUCMF | TGB | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 26 | 75 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 45 Fair valued | 81 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 28 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 93 | 65 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 43 | 40 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 87 | 95 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
LUCMF's Valuation (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for TGB (81) in the Precious Metals industry. This means that LUCMF’s stock grew somewhat faster than TGB’s over the last 12 months.
TGB's Profit vs Risk Rating (28) in the Precious Metals industry is significantly better than the same rating for LUCMF (100) in the null industry. This means that TGB’s stock grew significantly faster than LUCMF’s over the last 12 months.
TGB's SMR Rating (65) in the Precious Metals industry is in the same range as LUCMF (93) in the null industry. This means that TGB’s stock grew similarly to LUCMF’s over the last 12 months.
TGB's Price Growth Rating (40) in the Precious Metals industry is in the same range as LUCMF (43) in the null industry. This means that TGB’s stock grew similarly to LUCMF’s over the last 12 months.
LUCMF's P/E Growth Rating (87) in the null industry is in the same range as TGB (95) in the Precious Metals industry. This means that LUCMF’s stock grew similarly to TGB’s over the last 12 months.
| LUCMF | TGB | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 89% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 88% | 1 day ago 76% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 83% | 1 day ago 82% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 85% | 1 day ago 75% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 76% | 1 day ago 77% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 83% | 1 day ago 84% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 76% | 7 days ago 81% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 15 days ago 89% | 3 days ago 78% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 74% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 90% | 1 day ago 85% |
LUCMF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LUCMF and AOTVF have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LUCMF and AOTVF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LUCMF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LUCMF | 100% | +1.07% | ||
| AOTVF - LUCMF | 32% Poorly correlated | +5.32% | ||
| AAGFF - LUCMF | 31% Poorly correlated | -3.45% | ||
| TGB - LUCMF | 30% Poorly correlated | -1.66% | ||
| ARREF - LUCMF | 29% Poorly correlated | -0.39% | ||
| LUNMF - LUCMF | 29% Poorly correlated | -2.19% | ||
More | ||||
TGB and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, TGB has been closely correlated with HBM. These tickers have moved in lockstep 75% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if TGB jumps, then HBM could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To TGB | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TGB | 100% | -1.66% | ||
| HBM - TGB | 75% Closely correlated | +0.33% | ||
| FCX - TGB | 73% Closely correlated | -0.04% | ||
| SCCO - TGB | 72% Closely correlated | -1.02% | ||
| LUNMF - TGB | 69% Closely correlated | -2.19% | ||
| CSCCF - TGB | 66% Loosely correlated | -1.96% | ||
More | ||||