NWCCF
Price
$0.14
Change
+$0.01 (+7.69%)
Updated
May 20 closing price
Capitalization
25.81M
TMASF
Price
$0.14
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
May 21 closing price
Capitalization
9.09M
Interact to see
Advertisement

NWCCF vs TMASF

Header iconNWCCF vs TMASF Comparison
Open Charts NWCCF vs TMASFBanner chart's image
NORTHWEST COPPER
Price$0.14
Change+$0.01 (+7.69%)
Volume$23.5K
Capitalization25.81M
Temas Resources
Price$0.14
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$1.17K
Capitalization9.09M
NWCCF vs TMASF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
NWCCF vs. TMASF commentary
May 22, 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 NWCCF is a Hold and TMASF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
May 22, 2025
Stock price -- (NWCCF: $0.14 vs. TMASF: $0.14)
Brand notoriety: NWCCF and TMASF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Other Metals/Minerals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: NWCCF: 284% vs. TMASF: 8%
Market capitalization -- NWCCF: $25.81M vs. TMASF: $9.09M
NWCCF [@Other Metals/Minerals] is valued at $25.81M. TMASF’s [@Other Metals/Minerals] market capitalization is $9.09M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Other Metals/Minerals] industry ranges from $223.12B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Other Metals/Minerals] industry is $3.22B.

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).

NWCCF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileTMASF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • NWCCF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • TMASF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, both NWCCF and TMASF are a bad buy in the long-term.

Price Growth

NWCCF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а +17.47% price change this week, while TMASF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was +28.31% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +2.24%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +6.93%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.50%.

Reported Earning Dates

TMASF is expected to report earnings on Apr 28, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Other Metals/Minerals (+2.24% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NWCCF($25.8M) has a higher market cap than TMASF($9.09M). TMASF YTD gains are higher at: 161.583 vs. NWCCF (-26.396). NWCCF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -655.21K vs. TMASF (-3.47M). NWCCF has more cash in the bank: 3.76M vs. TMASF (57.7K). TMASF has less debt than NWCCF: TMASF (61K) vs NWCCF (112K). NWCCF (0) and TMASF (0) have equivalent revenues.
NWCCFTMASFNWCCF / TMASF
Capitalization25.8M9.09M284%
EBITDA-655.21K-3.47M19%
Gain YTD-26.396161.583-16%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash3.76M57.7K6,508%
Total Debt112K61K184%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
NWCCF: Fundamental Ratings
NWCCF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
30
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
99
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
42
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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
EVM8.86N/A
N/A
Eaton Vance California Municipal
ELQD80.44N/A
N/A
iShares ESG Advanced Inv Grd Corp Bd ETF
SDSI50.96-0.07
-0.14%
American Century® Short Dur Str Inc ETF
IXJ84.71-1.58
-1.83%
iShares Global Healthcare ETF
ISCG46.88-1.27
-2.64%
iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Growth ETF

NWCCF and

Correlation & Price change

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.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To NWCCF
1D Price
Change %
NWCCF100%
N/A
LITM - NWCCF
23%
Poorly correlated
-6.03%
CHXMF - NWCCF
20%
Poorly correlated
+0.86%
SLVDF - NWCCF
13%
Poorly correlated
+4.03%
LTSRF - NWCCF
12%
Poorly correlated
+3.96%
UROY - NWCCF
10%
Poorly correlated
+2.07%
More

TMASF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that TMASF and FSUMF have been poorly correlated (+27% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that TMASF and FSUMF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To TMASF
1D Price
Change %
TMASF100%
-3.21%
FSUMF - TMASF
27%
Poorly correlated
+1.43%
SLGGF - TMASF
21%
Poorly correlated
+3.52%
NVAAF - TMASF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
YORKF - TMASF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NWCCF - TMASF
15%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More