EFRGF
Price
$0.38
Change
+$0.06 (+18.75%)
Updated
Sep 4 closing price
Capitalization
50.06M
MAGE
Price
$0.13
Change
+$0.04 (+44.44%)
Updated
Sep 3 closing price
Capitalization
3.62M
Interact to see
Advertisement

EFRGF vs MAGE

Header iconEFRGF vs MAGE Comparison
Open Charts EFRGF vs MAGEBanner chart's image
Pasofino Gold
Price$0.38
Change+$0.06 (+18.75%)
Volume$500
Capitalization50.06M
Magellan Copper and Gold
Price$0.13
Change+$0.04 (+44.44%)
Volume$1.8K
Capitalization3.62M
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
Sep 06, 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
Sep 06, 2025
Stock price -- (EFRGF: $0.38 vs. MAGE: $0.13)
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: 2% vs. MAGE: 18%
Market capitalization -- EFRGF: $50.06M vs. MAGE: $3.62M
EFRGF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $50.06M. MAGE’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $3.62M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Precious Metals] industry ranges from $94.52B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Precious Metals] industry is $2.75B.

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, 4 bearish.
  • MAGE’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 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 +19.31% price change this week, while MAGE (@Precious Metals) price change was +32.76% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +3.81%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +14.34%, and the average quarterly price growth was +4956.16%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+3.81% 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($50.1M) has a higher market cap than MAGE($3.62M). MAGE YTD gains are higher at: 55.412 vs. EFRGF (-6.634). MAGE has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -664.43K vs. EFRGF (-6.86M). EFRGF has more cash in the bank: 1.18M vs. MAGE (589). EFRGF (0) and MAGE (0) have equivalent revenues.
EFRGFMAGEEFRGF / MAGE
Capitalization50.1M3.62M1,385%
EBITDA-6.86M-664.43K1,033%
Gain YTD-6.63455.412-12%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash1.18M589199,660%
Total DebtN/A859K-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
EFRGF vs MAGE: Fundamental Ratings
EFRGF
MAGE
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
9083
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
86
Overvalued
95
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
100100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
6447
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
20100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
8550

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 (95). 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.

MAGE's Price Growth Rating (47) in the null industry is in the same range as EFRGF (64). This means that MAGE’s stock grew similarly to EFRGF’s over the last 12 months.

EFRGF's P/E Growth Rating (20) 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 2 days ago
73%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
44%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
68%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
49%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
66%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
63%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
49%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
54%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
44%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
52%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
81%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
52%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
82%
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 %
RJF171.094.53
+2.72%
Raymond James Financial
SMHI6.480.08
+1.25%
SEACOR Marine Holdings
CTLP10.85N/A
N/A
Cantaloupe
TFSL13.62-0.04
-0.29%
TFS Financial Corp
AIMD3.63-0.11
-2.94%
AINOS Inc

EFRGF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To EFRGF
1D Price
Change %
EFRGF100%
+19.31%
MAGE - EFRGF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MRIRF - EFRGF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CALRF - EFRGF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CNL - EFRGF
-1%
Poorly correlated
-5.08%
GRLGF - EFRGF
-4%
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
+19.31%
ORLA - MAGE
23%
Poorly correlated
-1.49%
MAKOF - MAGE
4%
Poorly correlated
-2.68%
LONCF - MAGE
-0%
Poorly correlated
-4.57%
More