RMGGF
Price
$0.45
Change
+$0.01 (+2.27%)
Updated
Sep 4 closing price
Capitalization
975.59M
RMLFF
Price
$0.94
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Sep 5 closing price
Capitalization
587.93M
Interact to see
Advertisement

RMGGF vs RMLFF

Header iconRMGGF vs RMLFF Comparison
Open Charts RMGGF vs RMLFFBanner chart's image
Resolute Mining
Price$0.45
Change+$0.01 (+2.27%)
Volume$2K
Capitalization975.59M
Rusoro Mining
Price$0.94
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$80.47K
Capitalization587.93M
RMGGF vs RMLFF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
RMGGF
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
RMGGF 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 RMGGF is a Hold and RMLFF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 06, 2025
Stock price -- (RMGGF: $0.45 vs. RMLFF: $0.94)
Brand notoriety: RMGGF and RMLFF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: RMGGF: 15% vs. RMLFF: 45%
Market capitalization -- RMGGF: $975.59M vs. RMLFF: $587.93M
RMGGF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $975.59M. 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).

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

  • RMGGF’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 RMGGF.

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.

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

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

Price Growth

RMGGF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +0.76% 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
RMGGF($976M) has a higher market cap than RMLFF($588M). RMGGF YTD gains are higher at: 105.061 vs. RMLFF (63.576).
RMGGFRMLFFRMGGF / RMLFF
Capitalization976M588M166%
EBITDAN/A-51.83M-
Gain YTD105.06163.576165%
P/E Ratio77.71N/A-
RevenueN/A0-
Total CashN/A496K-
Total DebtN/A82.1M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
RMGGF vs RMLFF: Fundamental Ratings
RMGGF
RMLFF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
9027
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
87
Overvalued
38
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10034
SMR RATING
1..100
97100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4139
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3889
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5050

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 RMGGF (87). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RMGGF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's Profit vs Risk Rating (34) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for RMGGF (100). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew significantly faster than RMGGF’s over the last 12 months.

RMGGF's SMR Rating (97) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (100). This means that RMGGF’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 RMGGF (41). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to RMGGF’s over the last 12 months.

RMGGF's P/E Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for RMLFF (89). This means that RMGGF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RMLFF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RMGGFRMLFF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
57%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
73%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
76%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
77%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
67%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
73%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
69%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
73%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
63%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
76%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
65%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
71%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 19 days ago
81%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
69%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
82%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
52%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
72%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
RMGGF
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

RMGGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RMGGF and RMLRF have been poorly correlated (+6% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RMGGF and RMLRF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RMGGF
1D Price
Change %
RMGGF100%
N/A
RMLRF - RMGGF
6%
Poorly correlated
+1.53%
RMETF - RMGGF
6%
Poorly correlated
+26.65%
RVLGF - RMGGF
2%
Poorly correlated
-1.42%
RMLFF - RMGGF
2%
Poorly correlated
-0.05%
RRDMF - RMGGF
0%
Poorly correlated
-3.26%
More

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