CTJHY
Price
$9.00
Change
-$0.30 (-3.23%)
Updated
Mar 27 closing price
Capitalization
403.1M
PGXPF
Price
$0.07
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jul 1 closing price
Capitalization
2.89M
Interact to see
Advertisement

CTJHY vs PGXPF

Header iconCTJHY vs PGXPF Comparison
Open Charts CTJHY vs PGXPFBanner chart's image
Citic Resources Holdings
Price$9.00
Change-$0.30 (-3.23%)
Volume$100
Capitalization403.1M
Pelangio Exploration
Price$0.07
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$30K
Capitalization2.89M
CTJHY vs PGXPF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CTJHY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
PGXPF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CTJHY vs. PGXPF commentary
Jul 07, 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 CTJHY is a Hold and PGXPF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 07, 2025
Stock price -- (CTJHY: $8.34 vs. PGXPF: $0.07)
Brand notoriety: CTJHY and PGXPF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Other Metals/Minerals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CTJHY: 100% vs. PGXPF: 62%
Market capitalization -- CTJHY: $403.1M vs. PGXPF: $2.89M
CTJHY [@Other Metals/Minerals] is valued at $403.1M. PGXPF’s [@Other Metals/Minerals] market capitalization is $2.89M. 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 $3.1B.

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).

CTJHY’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whilePGXPF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CTJHY’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while PGXPF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CTJHY’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 0 bearish.
  • PGXPF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CTJHY is a better buy in the short-term than PGXPF.

Price Growth

CTJHY (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while PGXPF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was -2.26% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +3.13%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +8.84%, and the average quarterly price growth was +30.03%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Other Metals/Minerals (+3.13% 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
CTJHY($403M) has a higher market cap than PGXPF($2.89M). PGXPF YTD gains are higher at: 253.089 vs. CTJHY (10.974). CTJHY has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.14B vs. PGXPF (-1.61M). CTJHY has higher revenues than PGXPF: CTJHY (4.68B) vs PGXPF (-400K).
CTJHYPGXPFCTJHY / PGXPF
Capitalization403M2.89M13,959%
EBITDA1.14B-1.61M-71,142%
Gain YTD10.974253.0894%
P/E Ratio3.82N/A-
Revenue4.68B-400K-1,170,250%
Total CashN/A703K-
Total DebtN/A40K-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CTJHY vs PGXPF: Fundamental Ratings
CTJHY
PGXPF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
1
Undervalued
88
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
91100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5935
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
81100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a85

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.

CTJHY's Valuation (1) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for PGXPF (88). This means that CTJHY’s stock grew significantly faster than PGXPF’s over the last 12 months.

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

CTJHY's SMR Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as PGXPF (100). This means that CTJHY’s stock grew similarly to PGXPF’s over the last 12 months.

PGXPF's Price Growth Rating (35) in the null industry is in the same range as CTJHY (59). This means that PGXPF’s stock grew similarly to CTJHY’s over the last 12 months.

CTJHY's P/E Growth Rating (81) in the null industry is in the same range as PGXPF (100). This means that CTJHY’s stock grew similarly to PGXPF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CTJHYPGXPF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
67%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
75%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
74%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
19%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
68%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
19%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
66%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
65%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
84%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
59%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CTJHY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
PGXPF
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 %
PASG0.460.05
+13.51%
Passage Bio
ANGO9.580.19
+2.02%
AngioDynamics
ITUB6.920.11
+1.62%
Itau Unibanco Banco Holding SA
TRS29.970.21
+0.71%
TriMas Corp
SLM33.870.07
+0.21%
SLM Corp

CTJHY and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CTJHY has been loosely correlated with ORMNF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 34% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CTJHY jumps, then ORMNF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CTJHY
1D Price
Change %
CTJHY100%
N/A
ORMNF - CTJHY
34%
Loosely correlated
N/A
VULMF - CTJHY
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PGXPF - CTJHY
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A

PGXPF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that PGXPF and CBBLF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PGXPF and CBBLF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To PGXPF
1D Price
Change %
PGXPF100%
N/A
CBBLF - PGXPF
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NWCBF - PGXPF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HANCF - PGXPF
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
DCNNF - PGXPF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LITM - PGXPF
21%
Poorly correlated
+1.51%
More