GFGSF
Price
$0.11
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 24 closing price
Capitalization
33.15M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
GGLDF
Price
$0.28
Change
+$0.01 (+3.70%)
Updated
Dec 24 closing price
Capitalization
53.77M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

GFGSF vs GGLDF

Header iconGFGSF vs GGLDF Comparison
Open Charts GFGSF vs GGLDFBanner chart's image
GFG Resources
Price$0.11
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$334K
Capitalization33.15M
Getchell Gold
Price$0.28
Change+$0.01 (+3.70%)
Volume$34.73K
Capitalization53.77M
GFGSF vs GGLDF Comparison Chart in %
GFGSF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
GGLDF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GFGSF vs. GGLDF commentary
Dec 26, 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 GFGSF is a Buy and GGLDF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 26, 2025
Stock price -- (GFGSF: $0.11 vs. GGLDF: $0.28)
Brand notoriety: GFGSF and GGLDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GFGSF: 153% vs. GGLDF: 15%
Market capitalization -- GFGSF: $33.15M vs. GGLDF: $53.77M
GFGSF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $33.15M. GGLDF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $53.77M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Precious Metals] industry ranges from $121.74B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Precious Metals] industry is $4B.

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).

GFGSF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGGLDF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

GFGSF’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GGLDF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • GFGSF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • GGLDF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both GFGSF and GGLDF are a good buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

GFGSF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +5.58% price change this week, while GGLDF (@Precious Metals) price change was +4.67% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +10.72%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +21.13%, and the average quarterly price growth was +85.45%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+10.72% 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
GGLDF($53.8M) has a higher market cap than GFGSF($33.2M). GGLDF YTD gains are higher at: 187.179 vs. GFGSF (-12.709). GFGSF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.58M vs. GGLDF (-5.2M). GFGSF has more cash in the bank: 4.61M vs. GGLDF (4.17M). GGLDF has less debt than GFGSF: GGLDF (5.48K) vs GFGSF (141K). GFGSF (0) and GGLDF (0) have equivalent revenues.
GFGSFGGLDFGFGSF / GGLDF
Capitalization33.2M53.8M62%
EBITDA1.58M-5.2M-30%
Gain YTD-12.709187.179-7%
P/E Ratio15.17N/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash4.61M4.17M111%
Total Debt141K5.48K2,574%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GFGSF vs GGLDF: Fundamental Ratings
GFGSF
GGLDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
569
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
61
Fair valued
72
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10094
SMR RATING
1..100
87100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5138
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
70100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
9085

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.

GFGSF's Valuation (61) in the null industry is in the same range as GGLDF (72). This means that GFGSF’s stock grew similarly to GGLDF’s over the last 12 months.

GGLDF's Profit vs Risk Rating (94) in the null industry is in the same range as GFGSF (100). This means that GGLDF’s stock grew similarly to GFGSF’s over the last 12 months.

GFGSF's SMR Rating (87) in the null industry is in the same range as GGLDF (100). This means that GFGSF’s stock grew similarly to GGLDF’s over the last 12 months.

GGLDF's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as GFGSF (51). This means that GGLDF’s stock grew similarly to GFGSF’s over the last 12 months.

GFGSF's P/E Growth Rating (70) in the null industry is in the same range as GGLDF (100). This means that GFGSF’s stock grew similarly to GGLDF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GFGSFGGLDF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
85%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
83%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
75%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
84%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
75%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
80%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
74%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
78%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
85%
Bearish Trend 8 days ago
87%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
86%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
82%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
GFGSF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
GGLDF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
ALVLF0.19N/A
+1.58%
Big Ridge Gold Corp.
CALZF0.75N/A
N/A
Polynovo Ltd.
TNABF3.15N/A
N/A
Tenaga Nasional Berhad
GIFX0.03N/A
N/A
Gifa, Inc.
PANHF1.85N/A
N/A
Ping An Healthcare & Technology Co Ltd.

GFGSF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GFGSF
1D Price
Change %
GFGSF100%
-1.89%
WVMDF - GFGSF
20%
Poorly correlated
+1.47%
GBBFF - GFGSF
12%
Poorly correlated
+14.48%
GFKRF - GFGSF
10%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GFIOF - GFGSF
9%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GGLDF - GFGSF
5%
Poorly correlated
+2.71%
More

GGLDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GGLDF has been loosely correlated with CALRF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GGLDF jumps, then CALRF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GGLDF
1D Price
Change %
GGLDF100%
+2.71%
CALRF - GGLDF
36%
Loosely correlated
N/A
GAU - GGLDF
32%
Poorly correlated
-1.85%
THM - GGLDF
29%
Poorly correlated
-3.37%
PAAS - GGLDF
28%
Poorly correlated
-0.02%
KGC - GGLDF
27%
Poorly correlated
-0.61%
More