CHPGF
Price
$0.61
Change
+$0.01 (+1.67%)
Updated
Dec 18 closing price
MWSNF
Price
$0.66
Change
-$0.04 (-5.71%)
Updated
Dec 18 closing price
Ad is loading...

CHPGF vs MWSNF

Header iconCHPGF vs MWSNF Comparison
Open Charts CHPGF vs MWSNFBanner chart's image
Chesapeake Gold
Price$0.61
Change+$0.01 (+1.67%)
Volume$94.38K
CapitalizationN/A
Mawson Gold
Price$0.66
Change-$0.04 (-5.71%)
Volume$48.55K
CapitalizationN/A
CHPGF vs MWSNF Comparison Chart
Loading...
CHPGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MWSNF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CHPGF vs. MWSNF commentary
Dec 19, 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 CHPGF is a Hold and MWSNF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (CHPGF: $0.61 vs. MWSNF: $0.66)
Brand notoriety: CHPGF and MWSNF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CHPGF: 383% vs. MWSNF: 46%
Market capitalization -- CHPGF: $86.4M vs. MWSNF: $31.14M
CHPGF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $86.4M. MWSNF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $31.14M. 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 $1.04B.

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).

CHPGF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMWSNF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CHPGF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MWSNF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CHPGF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 2 bearish.
  • MWSNF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CHPGF is a better buy in the short-term than MWSNF.

Price Growth

CHPGF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -9.09% price change this week, while MWSNF (@Precious Metals) price change was -17.91% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -5.24%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.93%, and the average quarterly price growth was -1.11%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-5.24% 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
CHPGF($86.4M) has a higher market cap than MWSNF($31.1M). MWSNF YTD gains are higher at: 145.741 vs. CHPGF (-54.883). MWSNF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -6.05M vs. CHPGF (-10.49M). CHPGF has more cash in the bank: 25.5M vs. MWSNF (18M). MWSNF has less debt than CHPGF: MWSNF (229K) vs CHPGF (700K). CHPGF (0) and MWSNF (0) have equivalent revenues.
CHPGFMWSNFCHPGF / MWSNF
Capitalization86.4M31.1M278%
EBITDA-10.49M-6.05M173%
Gain YTD-54.883145.741-38%
P/E RatioN/A416.67-
Revenue00-
Total Cash25.5M18M142%
Total Debt700K229K306%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CHPGF vs MWSNF: Fundamental Ratings
CHPGF
MWSNF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5768
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
27
Undervalued
94
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10017
SMR RATING
1..100
9298
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
9538
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
10088
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

CHPGF's Valuation (27) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for MWSNF (94). This means that CHPGF’s stock grew significantly faster than MWSNF’s over the last 12 months.

MWSNF's Profit vs Risk Rating (17) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CHPGF (100). This means that MWSNF’s stock grew significantly faster than CHPGF’s over the last 12 months.

CHPGF's SMR Rating (92) in the null industry is in the same range as MWSNF (98). This means that CHPGF’s stock grew similarly to MWSNF’s over the last 12 months.

MWSNF's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CHPGF (95). This means that MWSNF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CHPGF’s over the last 12 months.

MWSNF's P/E Growth Rating (88) in the null industry is in the same range as CHPGF (100). This means that MWSNF’s stock grew similarly to CHPGF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CHPGFMWSNF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
76%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
78%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
85%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
89%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
87%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
80%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
83%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
87%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
84%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
85%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
84%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 8 days ago
83%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
80%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
85%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
90%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CHPGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MWSNF
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 %
AAPL248.05-5.43
-2.14%
Apple
SPY586.28-18.01
-2.98%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust
BTC.X100041.540000-6099.062500
-5.75%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
TSLA440.13-39.73
-8.28%
Tesla
GME28.55-2.71
-8.67%
GameStop Corp

CHPGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CHPGF and GSHRF have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CHPGF and GSHRF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CHPGF
1D Price
Change %
CHPGF100%
+2.01%
GSHRF - CHPGF
29%
Poorly correlated
+7.39%
WTHVF - CHPGF
29%
Poorly correlated
+7.84%
MMNGF - CHPGF
27%
Poorly correlated
+5.56%
RSNVF - CHPGF
25%
Poorly correlated
-3.13%
LOMLF - CHPGF
25%
Poorly correlated
-3.80%
More

MWSNF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MWSNF and STLRF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MWSNF and STLRF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MWSNF
1D Price
Change %
MWSNF100%
-5.04%
STLRF - MWSNF
20%
Poorly correlated
-4.31%
CHPGF - MWSNF
20%
Poorly correlated
+2.01%
NESRF - MWSNF
11%
Poorly correlated
-6.32%
MRZLF - MWSNF
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IDR - MWSNF
5%
Poorly correlated
-9.35%
More