NCMBF
Price
$0.02
Change
-$0.01 (-33.33%)
Updated
Jan 6 closing price
Capitalization
1.03M
RMLFF
Price
$0.49
Change
-$0.01 (-2.00%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
185.38M
Ad is loading...

NCMBF vs RMLFF

Header iconNCMBF vs RMLFF Comparison
Open Charts NCMBF vs RMLFFBanner chart's image
Goldon Resources
Price$0.02
Change-$0.01 (-33.33%)
Volume$10K
Capitalization1.03M
Rusoro Mining
Price$0.49
Change-$0.01 (-2.00%)
Volume$10.9K
Capitalization185.38M
NCMBF vs RMLFF Comparison Chart
Loading...
NCMBF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RMLFF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
NCMBF vs. RMLFF 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 NCMBF is a Hold and RMLFF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (NCMBF: $0.02 vs. RMLFF: $0.49)
Brand notoriety: NCMBF and RMLFF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: NCMBF: 62% vs. RMLFF: 6%
Market capitalization -- NCMBF: $1.03M vs. RMLFF: $185.38M
NCMBF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $1.03M. RMLFF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $185.38M. 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).

NCMBF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileRMLFF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

NCMBF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while RMLFF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • NCMBF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 1 bearish.
  • RMLFF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both NCMBF and RMLFF are a good buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

NCMBF (@Precious Metals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while RMLFF (@Precious Metals) price change was -7.55% 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
RMLFF($185M) has a higher market cap than NCMBF($1.03M). NCMBF YTD gains are higher at: -4.000 vs. RMLFF (-14.783). NCMBF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -4.81M vs. RMLFF (-6.06M). NCMBF has more cash in the bank: 35K vs. RMLFF (246). NCMBF (0) and RMLFF (0) have equivalent revenues.
NCMBFRMLFFNCMBF / RMLFF
Capitalization1.03M185M1%
EBITDA-4.81M-6.06M79%
Gain YTD-4.000-14.78327%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash35K24614,228%
Total DebtN/A35.3M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
NCMBF vs RMLFF: Fundamental Ratings
NCMBF
RMLFF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
47
Fair valued
37
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10045
SMR RATING
1..100
99100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
9290
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
10091
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.

RMLFF's Valuation (37) in the null industry is in the same range as NCMBF (47). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to NCMBF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's Profit vs Risk Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for NCMBF (100). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew somewhat faster than NCMBF’s over the last 12 months.

NCMBF's SMR Rating (99) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (100). This means that NCMBF’s stock grew similarly to RMLFF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's Price Growth Rating (90) in the null industry is in the same range as NCMBF (92). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to NCMBF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's P/E Growth Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as NCMBF (100). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to NCMBF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
NCMBFRMLFF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
72%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
82%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
86%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
87%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
79%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
78%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
80%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
79%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 13 days ago
81%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 20 days ago
81%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
73%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
74%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
67%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
NCMBF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RMLFF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
GLYC0.260.01
+3.09%
GlycoMimetics
ASTL8.320.07
+0.85%
Algoma Steel Group
NEOG11.56-0.04
-0.34%
Neogen Corp
VRSN209.72-0.96
-0.46%
VeriSign
OGI1.55-0.02
-1.27%
Organigram Holdings

NCMBF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, NCMBF has been loosely correlated with RMLFF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 33% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if NCMBF jumps, then RMLFF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To NCMBF
1D Price
Change %
NCMBF100%
N/A
RMLFF - NCMBF
33%
Loosely correlated
-2.00%
SKHRF - NCMBF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
AAUGF - NCMBF
21%
Poorly correlated
+25.00%
ASGOF - NCMBF
21%
Poorly correlated
-5.69%
GLDG - NCMBF
17%
Poorly correlated
+1.00%
More

RMLFF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, RMLFF has been loosely correlated with NCMBF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 33% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if RMLFF jumps, then NCMBF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RMLFF
1D Price
Change %
RMLFF100%
-2.00%
NCMBF - RMLFF
33%
Loosely correlated
N/A
ORAAF - RMLFF
29%
Poorly correlated
-1.96%
GDRZF - RMLFF
22%
Poorly correlated
+1.44%
BADEF - RMLFF
21%
Poorly correlated
+1.10%
GRCAF - RMLFF
20%
Poorly correlated
-18.36%
More