LGO vs MMSDF
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 LGO is a Hold and MMSDF is a Hold.
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).
LGO’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileMMSDF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- LGO’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- MMSDF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
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.
LGO’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- LGO’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
LGO (@Other Metals/Minerals) experienced а +7.27% price change this week, while MMSDF (@Other Metals/Minerals) price change was +13.57% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Other Metals/Minerals industry was +2.44%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +8.90%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.15%.
Reported Earning Dates
LGO is expected to report earnings on May 20, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Other Metals/Minerals (+2.44% 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.
| LGO | MMSDF | LGO / MMSDF | |
| Capitalization | 105M | 23.4M | 449% |
| EBITDA | 3.82M | -3.76M | -102% |
| Gain YTD | 2.907 | 65.455 | 4% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | 112.36 | - |
| Revenue | 199M | 0 | - |
| Total Cash | 42.7M | 2.63M | 1,625% |
| Total Debt | 76.5M | 165K | 46,364% |
LGO | MMSDF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 13 | 27 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 75 Overvalued | 87 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 95 | 90 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 60 | 94 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 99 | 2 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 35 | 50 |
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.
LGO's Valuation (75) in the null industry is in the same range as MMSDF (87). This means that LGO’s stock grew similarly to MMSDF’s over the last 12 months.
LGO's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as MMSDF (100). This means that LGO’s stock grew similarly to MMSDF’s over the last 12 months.
MMSDF's SMR Rating (90) in the null industry is in the same range as LGO (95). This means that MMSDF’s stock grew similarly to LGO’s over the last 12 months.
LGO's Price Growth Rating (60) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MMSDF (94). This means that LGO’s stock grew somewhat faster than MMSDF’s over the last 12 months.
MMSDF's P/E Growth Rating (2) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for LGO (99). This means that MMSDF’s stock grew significantly faster than LGO’s over the last 12 months.
| LGO | |
|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 90% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 81% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 81% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 85% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 85% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 20 days ago 78% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 86% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 90% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 86% |
LGO and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LGO and FCX have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LGO and FCX's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LGO | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LGO | 100% | +2.31% | ||
| FCX - LGO | 32% Poorly correlated | +0.20% | ||
| TECK - LGO | 31% Poorly correlated | +1.34% | ||
| SCCO - LGO | 31% Poorly correlated | +0.57% | ||
| LAC - LGO | 30% Poorly correlated | -8.31% | ||
| RIO - LGO | 30% Poorly correlated | +1.03% | ||
More | ||||
MMSDF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that MMSDF and LITM have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MMSDF and LITM's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MMSDF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMSDF | 100% | +4.30% | ||
| LITM - MMSDF | 23% Poorly correlated | +29.23% | ||
| LGO - MMSDF | 18% Poorly correlated | +2.31% | ||
| DRCMF - MMSDF | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| FCX - MMSDF | 8% Poorly correlated | +0.20% | ||
| MP - MMSDF | 6% Poorly correlated | -0.33% | ||
More | ||||