CGLCF
Price
$0.18
Change
-$0.01 (-5.26%)
Updated
Sep 3 closing price
Capitalization
22.47M
NSUPF
Price
$0.95
Change
-$0.04 (-4.04%)
Updated
Sep 3 closing price
Capitalization
163.64M
Interact to see
Advertisement

CGLCF vs NSUPF

Header iconCGLCF vs NSUPF Comparison
Open Charts CGLCF vs NSUPFBanner chart's image
Cassiar Gold
Price$0.18
Change-$0.01 (-5.26%)
Volume$523.85K
Capitalization22.47M
Northern Superior Resources
Price$0.95
Change-$0.04 (-4.04%)
Volume$368.75K
Capitalization163.64M
CGLCF vs NSUPF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CGLCF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
NSUPF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CGLCF vs. NSUPF commentary
Sep 04, 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 CGLCF is a Hold and NSUPF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 04, 2025
Stock price -- (CGLCF: $0.18 vs. NSUPF: $0.95)
Brand notoriety: CGLCF and NSUPF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CGLCF: 206% vs. NSUPF: 168%
Market capitalization -- CGLCF: $22.47M vs. NSUPF: $163.64M
CGLCF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $22.47M. NSUPF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $163.64M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Precious Metals] industry ranges from $93.2B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Precious Metals] industry is $2.78B.

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).

CGLCF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileNSUPF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CGLCF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while NSUPF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

CGLCF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +19.11% price change this week, while NSUPF (@Precious Metals) price change was +2.59% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +7.75%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +33.13%, and the average quarterly price growth was +4896.28%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+7.75% 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
NSUPF($164M) has a higher market cap than CGLCF($22.5M). NSUPF YTD gains are higher at: 176.259 vs. CGLCF (35.692). CGLCF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -8.25M vs. NSUPF (-15.04M). NSUPF has more cash in the bank: 8.4M vs. CGLCF (2.61M). CGLCF (0) and NSUPF (0) have equivalent revenues.
CGLCFNSUPFCGLCF / NSUPF
Capitalization22.5M164M14%
EBITDA-8.25M-15.04M55%
Gain YTD35.692176.25920%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash2.61M8.4M31%
Total Debt16.8KN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CGLCF vs NSUPF: Fundamental Ratings
CGLCF
NSUPF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
910
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
44
Fair valued
96
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10061
SMR RATING
1..100
97100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4535
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
9085

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.

CGLCF's Valuation (44) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for NSUPF (96). This means that CGLCF’s stock grew somewhat faster than NSUPF’s over the last 12 months.

NSUPF's Profit vs Risk Rating (61) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CGLCF (100). This means that NSUPF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CGLCF’s over the last 12 months.

CGLCF's SMR Rating (97) in the null industry is in the same range as NSUPF (100). This means that CGLCF’s stock grew similarly to NSUPF’s over the last 12 months.

NSUPF's Price Growth Rating (35) in the null industry is in the same range as CGLCF (45). This means that NSUPF’s stock grew similarly to CGLCF’s over the last 12 months.

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

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CGLCFNSUPF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
82%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
86%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
77%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
87%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
77%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
84%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
77%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
82%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
79%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
79%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
81%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
87%
Bearish Trend 17 days ago
84%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
82%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
87%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CGLCF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
NSUPF
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 %
BKRIY15.170.25
+1.68%
Bank Ireland Group PLC
LIOPF9.13N/A
N/A
Lion Corp.
TROUF0.02N/A
N/A
Troubadour Resources Inc.
LOECF0.57-0.01
-1.33%
LOGAN ENERGY CORP
OONEF0.29-0.01
-4.02%
01 Communique Lab Inc.

CGLCF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CGLCF has been loosely correlated with STLRF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CGLCF jumps, then STLRF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CGLCF
1D Price
Change %
CGLCF100%
-5.16%
STLRF - CGLCF
36%
Loosely correlated
-2.53%
NSUPF - CGLCF
35%
Loosely correlated
-4.04%
MAUTF - CGLCF
29%
Poorly correlated
-2.30%
RIOFF - CGLCF
27%
Poorly correlated
-1.52%
MAKOF - CGLCF
26%
Poorly correlated
+1.59%
More

NSUPF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, NSUPF has been loosely correlated with STLRF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if NSUPF jumps, then STLRF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To NSUPF
1D Price
Change %
NSUPF100%
-4.04%
STLRF - NSUPF
36%
Loosely correlated
-2.53%
CGLCF - NSUPF
35%
Loosely correlated
-5.16%
VITFF - NSUPF
32%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LGDTF - NSUPF
31%
Poorly correlated
-3.37%
BCEKF - NSUPF
31%
Poorly correlated
+6.46%
More