FCLIF
Price
$0.18
Change
-$0.01 (-5.26%)
Updated
Aug 15 closing price
Capitalization
12.69M
MLPNF
Price
$1.19
Change
+$0.01 (+0.85%)
Updated
Aug 15 closing price
Capitalization
134.95M
Interact to see
Advertisement

FCLIF vs MLPNF

Header iconFCLIF vs MLPNF Comparison
Open Charts FCLIF vs MLPNFBanner chart's image
Full Circle Lithium
Price$0.18
Change-$0.01 (-5.26%)
Volume$6.47K
Capitalization12.69M
MILLENNIAL POTASH
Price$1.19
Change+$0.01 (+0.85%)
Volume$168.02K
Capitalization134.95M
FCLIF vs MLPNF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
FCLIF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MLPNF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
FCLIF vs. MLPNF 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 FCLIF is a Hold and MLPNF is a StrongBuy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 18, 2025
Stock price -- (FCLIF: $0.18 vs. MLPNF: $1.19)
Brand notoriety: FCLIF and MLPNF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Other Metals/Minerals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: FCLIF: 52% vs. MLPNF: 157%
Market capitalization -- FCLIF: $12.69M vs. MLPNF: $134.95M
FCLIF [@Other Metals/Minerals] is valued at $12.69M. MLPNF’s [@Other Metals/Minerals] market capitalization is $134.95M. 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 $2.26B.

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).

FCLIF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileMLPNF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

FCLIF’s TA Score shows that 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MLPNF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • FCLIF’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • MLPNF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both FCLIF and MLPNF are a good buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

FCLIF (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а +11.75% price change this week, while MLPNF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was +3.03% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +1.88%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +7.68%, and the average quarterly price growth was +40.33%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Other Metals/Minerals (+1.88% 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
MLPNF($135M) has a higher market cap than FCLIF($12.7M). MLPNF YTD gains are higher at: 449.781 vs. FCLIF (10.166). FCLIF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -2.38M vs. MLPNF (-3.98M). MLPNF has more cash in the bank: 7.5M vs. FCLIF (722K). FCLIF has higher revenues than MLPNF: FCLIF (600K) vs MLPNF (0).
FCLIFMLPNFFCLIF / MLPNF
Capitalization12.7M135M9%
EBITDA-2.38M-3.98M60%
Gain YTD10.166449.7812%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue600K0-
Total Cash722K7.5M10%
Total DebtN/A88.9K-
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
FCLIFMLPNF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
80%
Bearish Trend 8 days ago
71%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
78%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
77%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
64%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
75%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
70%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
75%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
58%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
64%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
78%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
84%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
84%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 21 days ago
70%
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
76%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
85%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
78%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
FCLIF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MLPNF
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 %
SHALY11.00N/A
N/A
Shangri-La Asia Ltd.
AHKSF7.50N/A
N/A
Asahi Kaisei Corp.
UBAB55.50N/A
N/A
United Bancorporation of Alabama, Inc.
CNTHP51.45-0.25
-0.48%
Connecticut Light & Power Co. (The)
LVGLF0.14N/A
-2.29%
LAKE VICTORIA GOLD LTD.

FCLIF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that FCLIF and MMILF have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FCLIF and MMILF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FCLIF
1D Price
Change %
FCLIF100%
-7.74%
MMILF - FCLIF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
VLTLF - FCLIF
10%
Poorly correlated
-6.32%
EVKRF - FCLIF
8%
Poorly correlated
-3.14%
MLPNF - FCLIF
7%
Poorly correlated
+0.51%
LZM - FCLIF
5%
Poorly correlated
-0.44%
More

MLPNF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MLPNF
1D Price
Change %
MLPNF100%
+0.51%
IPGDF - MLPNF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
ZNCXF - MLPNF
21%
Poorly correlated
+10.49%
NVAAF - MLPNF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GRCMF - MLPNF
15%
Poorly correlated
N/A
USGO - MLPNF
12%
Poorly correlated
-0.13%
More