GSISF
Price
$1.67
Change
+$0.07 (+4.38%)
Updated
Dec 13 closing price
MJGCF
Price
$0.05
Change
-$0.01 (-16.67%)
Updated
Dec 12 closing price
Ad is loading...

GSISF vs MJGCF

Header iconGSISF vs MJGCF Comparison
Open Charts GSISF vs MJGCFBanner chart's image
Genesis Minerals
Price$1.67
Change+$0.07 (+4.38%)
Volume$3.76K
CapitalizationN/A
Majestic Gold
Price$0.05
Change-$0.01 (-16.67%)
Volume$2K
CapitalizationN/A
GSISF vs MJGCF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GSISF vs. MJGCF commentary
Dec 19, 2024

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 GSISF is a Hold and MJGCF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (GSISF: $1.67 vs. MJGCF: $0.05)
Brand notoriety: GSISF and MJGCF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GSISF: 155% vs. MJGCF: 21%
Market capitalization -- GSISF: $1.02B vs. MJGCF: $70.79M
GSISF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $1.02B. MJGCF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $70.79M. 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 $1.03B.

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).

GSISF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMJGCF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

GSISF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +4.37% price change this week, while MJGCF (@Precious Metals) price change was -5.88% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was -3.68%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.12%, and the average quarterly price growth was -0.54%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (-3.68% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
GSISF($1.02B) has a higher market cap than MJGCF($70.8M). MJGCF has higher P/E ratio than GSISF: MJGCF (25.58) vs GSISF (0.99). GSISF YTD gains are higher at: 39.167 vs. MJGCF (-13.122). MJGCF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 31.9M vs. GSISF (-40.57M). MJGCF has more cash in the bank: 58.2M vs. GSISF (11.1M). MJGCF has higher revenues than GSISF: MJGCF (60.1M) vs GSISF (11M).
GSISFMJGCFGSISF / MJGCF
Capitalization1.02B70.8M1,438%
EBITDA-40.57M31.9M-127%
Gain YTD39.167-13.122-298%
P/E Ratio0.9925.584%
Revenue11M60.1M18%
Total Cash11.1M58.2M19%
Total DebtN/A4.44M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
MJGCF: Fundamental Ratings
MJGCF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
95
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
57
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
87
SMR RATING
1..100
66
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
64
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
73
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
75

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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
GME31.261.82
+6.18%
GameStop Corp
TSLA479.8616.84
+3.64%
Tesla
AAPL253.482.44
+0.97%
Apple
BTC.X106140.600000110.890625
+0.10%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
SPY604.29-2.50
-0.41%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust

GSISF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GSISF has been loosely correlated with GSRCF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 43% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GSISF jumps, then GSRCF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GSISF
1D Price
Change %
GSISF100%
N/A
GSRCF - GSISF
43%
Loosely correlated
N/A
MMTMF - GSISF
34%
Loosely correlated
-0.50%
MJGCF - GSISF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JNCCF - GSISF
27%
Poorly correlated
+6.00%
FFOXF - GSISF
26%
Poorly correlated
-3.14%
More

MJGCF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MJGCF and GSISF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MJGCF and GSISF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MJGCF
1D Price
Change %
MJGCF100%
N/A
GSISF - MJGCF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PMDRF - MJGCF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BYAGF - MJGCF
25%
Poorly correlated
+0.30%
ACRG - MJGCF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GMDMF - MJGCF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More