GDRZF
Price
$2.37
Change
-$0.05 (-2.07%)
Updated
Sep 5 closing price
Capitalization
288.23M
RMLFF
Price
$0.94
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Sep 5 closing price
Capitalization
587.93M
Interact to see
Advertisement

GDRZF vs RMLFF

Header iconGDRZF vs RMLFF Comparison
Open Charts GDRZF vs RMLFFBanner chart's image
Gold Reserve Ltd. (Bermuda)
Price$2.37
Change-$0.05 (-2.07%)
Volume$50.36K
Capitalization288.23M
Rusoro Mining
Price$0.94
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$80.47K
Capitalization587.93M
GDRZF vs RMLFF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
GDRZF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RMLFF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GDRZF vs. RMLFF 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 GDRZF is a Hold and RMLFF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 06, 2025
Stock price -- (GDRZF: $2.37 vs. RMLFF: $0.94)
Brand notoriety: GDRZF and RMLFF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GDRZF: 31% vs. RMLFF: 45%
Market capitalization -- GDRZF: $288.23M vs. RMLFF: $587.93M
GDRZF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $288.23M. RMLFF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $587.93M. 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 $2.83B.

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).

GDRZF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileRMLFF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

GDRZF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while RMLFF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

GDRZF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -8.85% price change this week, while RMLFF (@Precious Metals) price change was -2.54% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +4.88%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +15.51%, and the average quarterly price growth was +4862.14%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+4.88% 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
RMLFF($588M) has a higher market cap than GDRZF($288M). RMLFF YTD gains are higher at: 63.576 vs. GDRZF (50.000). GDRZF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -10.05M vs. RMLFF (-51.83M). GDRZF has more cash in the bank: 82.5M vs. RMLFF (496K). GDRZF (0) and RMLFF (0) have equivalent revenues.
GDRZFRMLFFGDRZF / RMLFF
Capitalization288M588M49%
EBITDA-10.05M-51.83M19%
Gain YTD50.00063.57679%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash82.5M496K16,633%
Total DebtN/A82.1M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GDRZF vs RMLFF: Fundamental Ratings
GDRZF
RMLFF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5227
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
76
Overvalued
38
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
8434
SMR RATING
1..100
96100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
6339
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
6089
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
7550

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.

RMLFF's Valuation (38) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GDRZF (76). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GDRZF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's Profit vs Risk Rating (34) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GDRZF (84). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GDRZF’s over the last 12 months.

GDRZF's SMR Rating (96) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (100). This means that GDRZF’s stock grew similarly to RMLFF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as GDRZF (63). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to GDRZF’s over the last 12 months.

GDRZF's P/E Growth Rating (60) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (89). This means that GDRZF’s stock grew similarly to RMLFF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GDRZFRMLFF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
81%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
73%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
83%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
77%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
76%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
73%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
73%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
81%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
76%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
83%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
71%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 9 days ago
77%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
82%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
80%
Bearish Trend 20 days ago
81%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
86%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
82%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
83%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
72%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
GDRZF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RMLFF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
FCIKX17.220.17
+1.00%
NYLI PineStone International Eq Inv Cl
HASCX43.19N/A
N/A
Harbor Small Cap Value Instl
FISPX8.69N/A
N/A
Federated Hermes Max-Cap Index IS
WEEIX11.49N/A
N/A
TETON Westwood Equity I
CBLCX55.59-0.09
-0.16%
Columbia Balanced C

GDRZF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GDRZF and RMLFF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GDRZF and RMLFF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GDRZF
1D Price
Change %
GDRZF100%
-2.07%
RMLFF - GDRZF
20%
Poorly correlated
-0.05%
EQX - GDRZF
6%
Poorly correlated
+9.03%
HYMC - GDRZF
6%
Poorly correlated
-0.18%
GAU - GDRZF
5%
Poorly correlated
+6.72%
CMCL - GDRZF
4%
Poorly correlated
+3.84%

RMLFF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RMLFF and GDRZF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RMLFF and GDRZF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RMLFF
1D Price
Change %
RMLFF100%
-0.05%
GDRZF - RMLFF
20%
Poorly correlated
-2.07%
RMRDF - RMLFF
10%
Poorly correlated
-2.87%
RRDMF - RMLFF
6%
Poorly correlated
-3.26%
RVLGF - RMLFF
4%
Poorly correlated
-1.42%
RMGGF - RMLFF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More