REDLF
Price
$0.23
Change
+$0.01 (+4.55%)
Updated
Oct 17 closing price
SAPLF
Price
$0.60
Change
-$0.08 (-11.76%)
Updated
Oct 17 closing price
Ad is loading...

REDLF vs SAPLF

Header iconREDLF vs SAPLF Comparison
Open Charts REDLF vs SAPLFBanner chart's image
VAULT MINERALS
Price$0.23
Change+$0.01 (+4.55%)
Volume$200
CapitalizationN/A
Sylvania Platinum
Price$0.60
Change-$0.08 (-11.76%)
Volume$6.11K
CapitalizationN/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
REDLF vs SAPLF Comparison Chart
Loading...
VS
REDLF vs. SAPLF commentary
Oct 18, 2024

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 REDLF is a Hold and SAPLF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Oct 18, 2024
Stock price -- (REDLF: $0.23 vs. SAPLF: $0.60)
Brand notoriety: REDLF and SAPLF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: REDLF: 0% vs. SAPLF: 41%
Market capitalization -- REDLF: $426.26M vs. SAPLF: $345.68M
REDLF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $426.26M. SAPLF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $345.68M. 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 $1.02B.

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).

REDLF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileSAPLF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • REDLF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • SAPLF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, SAPLF is a better buy in the long-term than REDLF.

Price Growth

REDLF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +5.96% price change this week, while SAPLF (@Precious Metals) price change was -9.09% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +2.12%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +11.06%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.61%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+2.12% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
REDLF($426M) has a higher market cap than SAPLF($346M). REDLF has higher P/E ratio than SAPLF: REDLF (26.18) vs SAPLF (6.47). REDLF YTD gains are higher at: 7.392 vs. SAPLF (-40.594). SAPLF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 84.5M vs. REDLF (-2.8M). REDLF has more cash in the bank: 116M vs. SAPLF (94.1M). SAPLF has less debt than REDLF: SAPLF (84K) vs REDLF (23M). REDLF has higher revenues than SAPLF: REDLF (245M) vs SAPLF (152M).
REDLFSAPLFREDLF / SAPLF
Capitalization426M346M123%
EBITDA-2.8M84.5M-3%
Gain YTD7.392-40.594-18%
P/E Ratio26.186.47404%
Revenue245M152M161%
Total Cash116M94.1M123%
Total Debt23M84K27,381%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
SAPLF: Fundamental Ratings
SAPLF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
78
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
3
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
82
SMR RATING
1..100
47
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
83
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
15
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50

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
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
AAPL232.150.37
+0.16%
Apple
SPY582.350.05
+0.01%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust
TSLA220.89-0.44
-0.20%
Tesla
BTC.X67399.836000-212.882810
-0.31%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
GME21.41-0.25
-1.15%
GameStop Corp

REDLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that REDLF and STRFF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that REDLF and STRFF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To REDLF
1D Price
Change %
REDLF100%
N/A
STRFF - REDLF
24%
Poorly correlated
-0.62%
SLSR - REDLF
9%
Poorly correlated
-0.22%
VINS - REDLF
9%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HAMRF - REDLF
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SAPLF - REDLF
7%
Poorly correlated
-4.41%
More

SAPLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SAPLF and STPGF have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SAPLF and STPGF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SAPLF
1D Price
Change %
SAPLF100%
-4.41%
STPGF - SAPLF
21%
Poorly correlated
+0.45%
ZIJMF - SAPLF
20%
Poorly correlated
-1.84%
RUPRF - SAPLF
20%
Poorly correlated
+2.60%
GSHRF - SAPLF
10%
Poorly correlated
-0.56%
REDLF - SAPLF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More