CTXXF
Price
$0.23
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Aug 15 closing price
Capitalization
35.11M
HCMLF
Price
$82.75
Change
-$0.25 (-0.30%)
Updated
Aug 13 closing price
Capitalization
46.28B
Interact to see
Advertisement

CTXXF vs HCMLF

Header iconCTXXF vs HCMLF Comparison
Open Charts CTXXF vs HCMLFBanner chart's image
Cematrix
Price$0.23
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$750
Capitalization35.11M
HOLCIM
Price$82.75
Change-$0.25 (-0.30%)
Volume$365
Capitalization46.28B
CTXXF vs HCMLF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CTXXF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
HCMLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CTXXF vs. HCMLF commentary
Aug 18, 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 CTXXF is a Hold and HCMLF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 18, 2025
Stock price -- (CTXXF: $0.23 vs. HCMLF: $82.75)
Brand notoriety: CTXXF and HCMLF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Construction Materials industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CTXXF: 4% vs. HCMLF: 3%
Market capitalization -- CTXXF: $35.11M vs. HCMLF: $46.28B
CTXXF [@Construction Materials] is valued at $35.11M. HCMLF’s [@Construction Materials] market capitalization is $46.28B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Construction Materials] industry ranges from $74.49B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Construction Materials] industry is $10.15B.

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).

CTXXF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileHCMLF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

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

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

Price Growth

CTXXF (@Construction Materials) experienced а -3.32% price change this week, while HCMLF (@Construction Materials) price change was -0.30% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Construction Materials industry was +0.43%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.70%, and the average quarterly price growth was +21.16%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Construction Materials (+0.43% weekly)

Many naturally occurring substances, such as clay, rocks, sand, and wood, even twigs and leaves have been used in construction material. Many man-made products are also in use. Vulcan Materials Co., Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. and Owens Corning Inc. are examples of construction material companies in the U.S. Performance of companies that extract or produce construction materials could at times depend on demand for residential and commercial buildings/real estate, and therefore in some cases could feel impacted by economic cycles.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
HCMLF($46.3B) has a higher market cap than CTXXF($35.1M). CTXXF has higher P/E ratio than HCMLF: CTXXF (22.21) vs HCMLF (11.73). HCMLF YTD gains are higher at: 64.212 vs. CTXXF (25.055). HCMLF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 6.95B vs. CTXXF (1.19M). HCMLF has more cash in the bank: 4.24B vs. CTXXF (8.48M). HCMLF has higher revenues than CTXXF: HCMLF (26.2B) vs CTXXF (33.6M).
CTXXFHCMLFCTXXF / HCMLF
Capitalization35.1M46.3B0%
EBITDA1.19M6.95B0%
Gain YTD25.05564.21239%
P/E Ratio22.2111.73189%
Revenue33.6M26.2B0%
Total Cash8.48M4.24B0%
Total Debt3.87MN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CTXXF vs HCMLF: Fundamental Ratings
CTXXF
HCMLF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8932
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
79
Overvalued
7
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10039
SMR RATING
1..100
9245
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4638
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3272
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
4985

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.

HCMLF's Valuation (7) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CTXXF (79). This means that HCMLF’s stock grew significantly faster than CTXXF’s over the last 12 months.

HCMLF's Profit vs Risk Rating (39) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CTXXF (100). This means that HCMLF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CTXXF’s over the last 12 months.

HCMLF's SMR Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CTXXF (92). This means that HCMLF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CTXXF’s over the last 12 months.

HCMLF's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as CTXXF (46). This means that HCMLF’s stock grew similarly to CTXXF’s over the last 12 months.

CTXXF's P/E Growth Rating (32) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HCMLF (72). This means that CTXXF’s stock grew somewhat faster than HCMLF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CTXXFHCMLF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
77%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
46%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
63%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
40%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
75%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
45%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
71%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
61%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
73%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
70%
Bearish Trend 17 days ago
57%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
71%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
46%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
67%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CTXXF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
HCMLF
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 %
MNTHY76.213.19
+4.37%
Minth Group, Ltd.
BEWFF0.60N/A
+0.55%
BeWhere Holdings Inc.
FHELF0.02N/A
+0.50%
FIRST HELIUM INC
SESMF35.00N/A
N/A
SUSS MICROTEC SE
TTDKF13.35-0.36
-2.61%
TDK Corp.

CTXXF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CTXXF and GCWOF have been poorly correlated (+8% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CTXXF and GCWOF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CTXXF
1D Price
Change %
CTXXF100%
+0.20%
GCWOF - CTXXF
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CMTOY - CTXXF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HLBZF - CTXXF
3%
Poorly correlated
+2.99%
HCMLF - CTXXF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IBJHF - CTXXF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

HCMLF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HCMLF
1D Price
Change %
HCMLF100%
N/A
HCMLY - HCMLF
31%
Poorly correlated
+0.06%
HDLMY - HCMLF
21%
Poorly correlated
+0.25%
CBUMY - HCMLF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FRCEF - HCMLF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CMTOY - HCMLF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More