KTGDF
Price
$0.25
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jun 27 closing price
Capitalization
10.39M
LMGDF
Price
$0.91
Change
-$0.01 (-1.09%)
Updated
Jun 25 closing price
Capitalization
125.92M
Interact to see
Advertisement

KTGDF vs LMGDF

Header iconKTGDF vs LMGDF Comparison
Open Charts KTGDF vs LMGDFBanner chart's image
K2 Gold
Price$0.25
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$8.4K
Capitalization10.39M
Lumina Gold
Price$0.91
Change-$0.01 (-1.09%)
Volume$113.36K
Capitalization125.92M
KTGDF vs LMGDF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
KTGDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
LMGDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
KTGDF vs. LMGDF commentary
Jun 30, 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 KTGDF is a Hold and LMGDF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jun 30, 2025
Stock price -- (KTGDF: $0.25 vs. LMGDF: $0.91)
Brand notoriety: KTGDF and LMGDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: KTGDF: 36% vs. LMGDF: 57%
Market capitalization -- KTGDF: $10.39M vs. LMGDF: $125.92M
KTGDF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $10.39M. LMGDF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $125.92M. 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 $1.1B.

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).

KTGDF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileLMGDF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

KTGDF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while LMGDF’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • KTGDF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • LMGDF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both KTGDF and LMGDF are a bad buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

KTGDF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +0.93% price change this week, while LMGDF (@Precious Metals) price change was -0.48% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +0.06%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +9.36%, and the average quarterly price growth was +54.26%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+0.06% 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
LMGDF($126M) has a higher market cap than KTGDF($10.4M). KTGDF (189.017) and LMGDF (179.816) have similar YTD gains . KTGDF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -1.33M vs. LMGDF (-21.38M). KTGDF has more cash in the bank: 2.87M vs. LMGDF (954K). KTGDF has less debt than LMGDF: KTGDF (40K) vs LMGDF (10.1M). KTGDF (0) and LMGDF (0) have equivalent revenues.
KTGDFLMGDFKTGDF / LMGDF
Capitalization10.4M126M8%
EBITDA-1.33M-21.38M6%
Gain YTD189.017179.816105%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash2.87M954K301%
Total Debt40K10.1M0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
KTGDF vs LMGDF: Fundamental Ratings
KTGDF
LMGDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5080
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
42
Fair valued
83
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
8561
SMR RATING
1..100
91100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3535
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/a

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.

KTGDF's Valuation (42) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LMGDF (83). This means that KTGDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LMGDF’s over the last 12 months.

LMGDF's Profit vs Risk Rating (61) in the null industry is in the same range as KTGDF (85). This means that LMGDF’s stock grew similarly to KTGDF’s over the last 12 months.

KTGDF's SMR Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as LMGDF (100). This means that KTGDF’s stock grew similarly to LMGDF’s over the last 12 months.

KTGDF's Price Growth Rating (35) in the null industry is in the same range as LMGDF (35). This means that KTGDF’s stock grew similarly to LMGDF’s over the last 12 months.

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

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
KTGDFLMGDF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
87%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
88%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
83%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
79%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
80%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
85%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
74%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 14 days ago
73%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
77%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
83%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
81%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
70%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
KTGDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
LMGDF
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 %
RYPIX59.650.37
+0.62%
Rydex Transportation Inv
JLCYX72.110.42
+0.59%
JHancock Fundamental Large Cap Core R2
CBLLX10.840.06
+0.56%
Allspring Large Cap Value Admin
GSMQX18.890.01
+0.05%
Goldman Sachs Small/Mid Cap Growth Svc
IRCIX11.54N/A
N/A
Voya Russell Small Cap Index Port S2

KTGDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that KTGDF and CRNLF have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that KTGDF and CRNLF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To KTGDF
1D Price
Change %
KTGDF100%
+1.34%
CRNLF - KTGDF
25%
Poorly correlated
+0.92%
BRWXF - KTGDF
21%
Poorly correlated
+1.63%
SASKF - KTGDF
20%
Poorly correlated
-0.80%
AIRRF - KTGDF
20%
Poorly correlated
-1.93%
LMGDF - KTGDF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

LMGDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, LMGDF has been loosely correlated with AUGG. These tickers have moved in lockstep 38% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if LMGDF jumps, then AUGG could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LMGDF
1D Price
Change %
LMGDF100%
N/A
AUGG - LMGDF
38%
Loosely correlated
-3.64%
DYNR - LMGDF
25%
Poorly correlated
+7.14%
AYASF - LMGDF
23%
Poorly correlated
-5.62%
GFIOF - LMGDF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GPTRF - LMGDF
21%
Poorly correlated
+0.20%
More