CNL
Price
$3.54
Change
+$0.08 (+2.31%)
Updated
Nov 15, 02:15 PM (EDT)
139 days until earnings call
PHNMF
Price
$0.30
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 14 closing price
Ad is loading...

CNL vs PHNMF

Header iconCNL vs PHNMF Comparison
Open Charts CNL vs PHNMFBanner chart's image
COLLECTIVE MINING
Price$3.54
Change+$0.08 (+2.31%)
Volume$200
CapitalizationN/A
Phenom Resources
Price$0.30
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$113.98K
CapitalizationN/A
CNL vs PHNMF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CNL vs. PHNMF commentary
Nov 16, 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 CNL is a Hold and PHNMF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 16, 2024
Stock price -- (CNL: $3.46 vs. PHNMF: $0.30)
Brand notoriety: CNL and PHNMF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CNL: 74% vs. PHNMF: 141%
Market capitalization -- CNL: $272.24M vs. PHNMF: $20.07M
CNL [@Precious Metals] is valued at $272.24M. PHNMF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $20.07M. 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 $1.03B.

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).

CNL’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whilePHNMF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

CNL (@Precious Metals) experienced а -9.42% price change this week, while PHNMF (@Precious Metals) price change was -9.42% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -4.57%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.91%, and the average quarterly price growth was -1.89%.

Reported Earning Dates

CNL is expected to report earnings on Apr 03, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-4.57% 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
CNL($272M) has a higher market cap than PHNMF($20.1M). PHNMF YTD gains are higher at: 80.723 vs. CNL (7.788). PHNMF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -1.17M vs. CNL (-16.99M). CNL has more cash in the bank: 26.7M vs. PHNMF (122K). PHNMF has less debt than CNL: PHNMF (0) vs CNL (71.9K). CNL (0) and PHNMF (0) have equivalent revenues.
CNLPHNMFCNL / PHNMF
Capitalization272M20.1M1,353%
EBITDA-16.99M-1.17M1,450%
Gain YTD7.78880.72310%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash26.7M122K21,885%
Total Debt71.9K0-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
PHNMF: Fundamental Ratings
PHNMF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
68
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
45
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
70
SMR RATING
1..100
92
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
60
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100
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
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
GME27.370.91
+3.44%
GameStop Corp
AAPL228.223.10
+1.38%
Apple
SPY593.35-3.84
-0.64%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust
BTC.X87250.430000-3333.734400
-3.68%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
TSLA311.18-19.06
-5.77%
Tesla

CNL and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CNL has been loosely correlated with VITFF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CNL jumps, then VITFF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CNL
1D Price
Change %
CNL100%
N/A
VITFF - CNL
35%
Loosely correlated
N/A
GSVRF - CNL
30%
Poorly correlated
-5.27%
CAHPF - CNL
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LGDTF - CNL
30%
Poorly correlated
+7.71%
BYAGF - CNL
30%
Poorly correlated
-3.33%
More

PHNMF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that PHNMF and KNTNF have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PHNMF and KNTNF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To PHNMF
1D Price
Change %
PHNMF100%
+4.53%
KNTNF - PHNMF
22%
Poorly correlated
+2.20%
LGCFF - PHNMF
21%
Poorly correlated
+5.73%
STLRF - PHNMF
20%
Poorly correlated
-2.55%
SAPLF - PHNMF
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CNL - PHNMF
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More