CAXPF
Price
$0.05
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 12 closing price
Capitalization
1.57M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
MLGCF
Price
$0.19
Change
+$0.03 (+18.75%)
Updated
Nov 12 closing price
Capitalization
1.98M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

CAXPF vs MLGCF

Header iconCAXPF vs MLGCF Comparison
Open Charts CAXPF vs MLGCFBanner chart's image
District Copper
Price$0.05
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$74K
Capitalization1.57M
M3 Metals
Price$0.19
Change+$0.03 (+18.75%)
Volume$2.5K
Capitalization1.98M
CAXPF vs MLGCF Comparison Chart in %
CAXPF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
MLGCF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CAXPF vs. MLGCF commentary
Nov 14, 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 CAXPF is a Hold and MLGCF is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 14, 2025
Stock price -- (CAXPF: $0.05 vs. MLGCF: $0.19)
Brand notoriety: CAXPF and MLGCF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Other Metals/Minerals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CAXPF: 266% vs. MLGCF: 15%
Market capitalization -- CAXPF: $1.57M vs. MLGCF: $1.98M
CAXPF [@Other Metals/Minerals] is valued at $1.57M. MLGCF’s [@Other Metals/Minerals] market capitalization is $1.98M. 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 $2.68B.

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).

CAXPF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileMLGCF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • CAXPF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • MLGCF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, MLGCF is a better buy in the long-term than CAXPF.

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.

CAXPF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MLGCF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CAXPF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • MLGCF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 1 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, MLGCF is a better buy in the short-term than CAXPF.

Price Growth

CAXPF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а -17.82% price change this week, while MLGCF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was +22.58% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +3.70%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -9.08%, and the average quarterly price growth was +167.93%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Other Metals/Minerals (+3.70% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
MLGCF($1.98M) has a higher market cap than CAXPF($1.57M). CAXPF YTD gains are higher at: 120.488 vs. MLGCF (31.488). MLGCF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -548.15K vs. CAXPF (-585.73K). MLGCF has more cash in the bank: 846K vs. CAXPF (238K). CAXPF (0) and MLGCF (0) have equivalent revenues.
CAXPFMLGCFCAXPF / MLGCF
Capitalization1.57M1.98M79%
EBITDA-585.73K-548.15K107%
Gain YTD120.48831.488383%
P/E RatioN/A15.82-
Revenue00-
Total Cash238K846K28%
Total DebtN/AN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CAXPF vs MLGCF: Fundamental Ratings
CAXPF
MLGCF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8743
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
81
Overvalued
91
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
9896
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5675
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
984
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.

CAXPF's Valuation (81) in the null industry is in the same range as MLGCF (91). This means that CAXPF’s stock grew similarly to MLGCF’s over the last 12 months.

CAXPF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as MLGCF (100). This means that CAXPF’s stock grew similarly to MLGCF’s over the last 12 months.

MLGCF's SMR Rating (96) in the null industry is in the same range as CAXPF (98). This means that MLGCF’s stock grew similarly to CAXPF’s over the last 12 months.

CAXPF's Price Growth Rating (56) in the null industry is in the same range as MLGCF (75). This means that CAXPF’s stock grew similarly to MLGCF’s over the last 12 months.

MLGCF's P/E Growth Rating (4) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CAXPF (98). This means that MLGCF’s stock grew significantly faster than CAXPF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CAXPFMLGCF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
50%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
67%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
30%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
46%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
51%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
41%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
26%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
49%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
26%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 21 days ago
90%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 8 days ago
82%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
39%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
60%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CAXPF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
MLGCF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
INDP2.890.17
+6.25%
Indaptus Therapeutics Inc
DTIL6.00N/A
N/A
Precision BioSciences
ICLR163.42N/A
N/A
ICON plc
RRBI67.94-0.01
-0.01%
Red River Bancshares
SM18.32-1.00
-5.18%
SM Energy Company

CAXPF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CAXPF and MLGCF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CAXPF and MLGCF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CAXPF
1D Price
Change %
CAXPF100%
-7.94%
MLGCF - CAXPF
31%
Poorly correlated
+22.58%
TAOFF - CAXPF
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CVWFF - CAXPF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SLROF - CAXPF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
REMRF - CAXPF
15%
Poorly correlated
+5.74%
More

MLGCF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MLGCF has been loosely correlated with PPZRF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 59% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MLGCF jumps, then PPZRF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MLGCF
1D Price
Change %
MLGCF100%
+22.58%
PPZRF - MLGCF
59%
Loosely correlated
N/A
CAXPF - MLGCF
31%
Poorly correlated
-7.94%
ULTHF - MLGCF
26%
Poorly correlated
-1.54%
EGPLF - MLGCF
25%
Poorly correlated
-1.56%
MLXEF - MLGCF
22%
Poorly correlated
+5.77%
More