EFRGF
Price
$0.40
Change
+$0.04 (+11.11%)
Updated
Jun 27 closing price
Capitalization
41.53M
MAGE
Price
$0.12
Change
-$0.01 (-7.69%)
Updated
Jun 17 closing price
Capitalization
3.41M
Interact to see
Advertisement

EFRGF vs MAGE

Header iconEFRGF vs MAGE Comparison
Open Charts EFRGF vs MAGEBanner chart's image
Pasofino Gold
Price$0.40
Change+$0.04 (+11.11%)
Volume$400
Capitalization41.53M
Magellan Copper and Gold
Price$0.12
Change-$0.01 (-7.69%)
Volume$13.24K
Capitalization3.41M
EFRGF vs MAGE Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
EFRGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MAGE
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
EFRGF vs. MAGE commentary
Jun 29, 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 EFRGF is a Hold and MAGE is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jun 29, 2025
Stock price -- (EFRGF: $0.40 vs. MAGE: $0.12)
Brand notoriety: EFRGF and MAGE are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: EFRGF: 7% vs. MAGE: 135%
Market capitalization -- EFRGF: $41.53M vs. MAGE: $3.41M
EFRGF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $41.53M. MAGE’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $3.41M. 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 $1.1B.

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).

EFRGF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMAGE’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

EFRGF’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MAGE’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • EFRGF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • MAGE’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, MAGE is a better buy in the short-term than EFRGF.

Price Growth

EFRGF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +9.65% price change this week, while MAGE (@Precious Metals) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +0.06%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +9.36%, and the average quarterly price growth was +54.26%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+0.06% 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
EFRGF($41.5M) has a higher market cap than MAGE($3.41M). MAGE YTD gains are higher at: 36.941 vs. EFRGF (-1.720). MAGE has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -531.64K vs. EFRGF (-5.44M). EFRGF has more cash in the bank: 1.39M vs. MAGE (2.14K). EFRGF (0) and MAGE (0) have equivalent revenues.
EFRGFMAGEEFRGF / MAGE
Capitalization41.5M3.41M1,217%
EBITDA-5.44M-531.64K1,024%
Gain YTD-1.72036.941-5%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash1.39M2.14K64,692%
Total DebtN/A903K-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
EFRGF vs MAGE: Fundamental Ratings
EFRGF
MAGE
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
86
Overvalued
96
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
100100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4064
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
18100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a95

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.

EFRGF's Valuation (86) in the null industry is in the same range as MAGE (96). This means that EFRGF’s stock grew similarly to MAGE’s over the last 12 months.

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

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

EFRGF's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as MAGE (64). This means that EFRGF’s stock grew similarly to MAGE’s over the last 12 months.

EFRGF's P/E Growth Rating (18) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for MAGE (100). This means that EFRGF’s stock grew significantly faster than MAGE’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
EFRGFMAGE
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
87%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
58%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
43%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
64%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
58%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
89%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
56%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
67%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
50%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
53%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
45%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
87%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
88%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
73%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
68%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
88%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
EFRGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MAGE
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 %
PPERY12.380.02
+0.15%
PT Bank Mandiri Persero TBK
NYWKF1.67N/A
N/A
NTG Clarity Networks Inc.
DLTTF5.38N/A
N/A
Dalata Hotel Group PLC
AHICF16.17N/A
N/A
Asahi Intec Co., Ltd.
MMILF0.04N/A
N/A
Metro Mining Ltd.

EFRGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that EFRGF and GMINF have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that EFRGF and GMINF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To EFRGF
1D Price
Change %
EFRGF100%
+9.65%
GMINF - EFRGF
23%
Poorly correlated
-8.03%
MAGE - EFRGF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
TIHRF - EFRGF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MRIRF - EFRGF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MSLVF - EFRGF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

MAGE and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MAGE and BDLNF have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MAGE and BDLNF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MAGE
1D Price
Change %
MAGE100%
N/A
BDLNF - MAGE
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
EFRGF - MAGE
23%
Poorly correlated
+9.65%
ORLA - MAGE
23%
Poorly correlated
-4.49%
BOCOF - MAGE
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MAKOF - MAGE
4%
Poorly correlated
-3.24%
More