NWCBF vs WRSLF
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 NWCBF is a Hold and WRSLF is a Hold.
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).
NWCBF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileWRSLF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- NWCBF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- WRSLF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
NWCBF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а -2.70% price change this week, while WRSLF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was -1.39%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.56%, and the average quarterly price growth was -10.62%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Other Metals/Minerals (-1.39% 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.
| NWCBF | WRSLF | NWCBF / WRSLF | |
| Capitalization | 53.3M | 204M | 26% |
| EBITDA | -1.82M | -10.63M | 17% |
| Gain YTD | -50.345 | -47.974 | 105% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | N/A | - |
| Revenue | N/A | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | 13.5M | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | N/A | - |
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
NWCBF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that NWCBF and PGXPF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that NWCBF and PGXPF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To NWCBF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NWCBF | 100% | N/A | ||
| PGXPF - NWCBF | 31% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HANCF - NWCBF | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| STLNF - NWCBF | 13% Poorly correlated | +1.94% | ||
| TELHF - NWCBF | 10% Poorly correlated | -11.24% | ||
| WRSLF - NWCBF | 10% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
WRSLF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that WRSLF and EMX have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that WRSLF and EMX's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To WRSLF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WRSLF | 100% | N/A | ||
| EMX - WRSLF | 25% Poorly correlated | -1.70% | ||
| TGB - WRSLF | 24% Poorly correlated | -1.50% | ||
| GLCNF - WRSLF | 23% Poorly correlated | +0.73% | ||
| ERDCF - WRSLF | 23% Poorly correlated | +3.67% | ||
| CTTZF - WRSLF | 22% Poorly correlated | -4.11% | ||
More | ||||