RMLFF
Price
$0.90
Change
-$0.04 (-4.26%)
Updated
Sep 24 closing price
Capitalization
586.45M
RMRDF
Price
$0.48
Change
-$0.02 (-4.00%)
Updated
Sep 24 closing price
Capitalization
167.64M
Interact to see
Advertisement

RMLFF vs RMRDF

Header iconRMLFF vs RMRDF Comparison
Open Charts RMLFF vs RMRDFBanner chart's image
Rusoro Mining
Price$0.90
Change-$0.04 (-4.26%)
Volume$282.15K
Capitalization586.45M
Radisson Mining Resources
Price$0.48
Change-$0.02 (-4.00%)
Volume$366.56K
Capitalization167.64M
RMLFF vs RMRDF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
RMLFF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RMRDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
RMLFF vs. RMRDF commentary
Sep 25, 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 RMLFF is a Hold and RMRDF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 25, 2025
Stock price -- (RMLFF: $0.90 vs. RMRDF: $0.48)
Brand notoriety: RMLFF and RMRDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: RMLFF: 132% vs. RMRDF: 85%
Market capitalization -- RMLFF: $586.45M vs. RMRDF: $167.64M
RMLFF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $586.45M. RMRDF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $167.64M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Precious Metals] industry ranges from $97.88B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Precious Metals] industry is $3.11B.

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).

RMLFF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileRMRDF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

RMLFF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while RMRDF’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • RMLFF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • RMRDF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 6 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, RMLFF is a better buy in the short-term than RMRDF.

Price Growth

RMLFF (@Precious Metals) experienced а -7.66% price change this week, while RMRDF (@Precious Metals) price change was -1.02% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +5.03%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +26.63%, and the average quarterly price growth was +6061.78%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+5.03% 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
RMLFF($586M) has a higher market cap than RMRDF($168M). RMRDF YTD gains are higher at: 99.798 vs. RMLFF (56.522). RMRDF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -2.4M vs. RMLFF (-77.57M). RMRDF has more cash in the bank: 14.9M vs. RMLFF (21K). RMLFF (0) and RMRDF (0) have equivalent revenues.
RMLFFRMRDFRMLFF / RMRDF
Capitalization586M168M349%
EBITDA-77.57M-2.4M3,232%
Gain YTD56.52299.79857%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash21K14.9M0%
Total Debt84.6MN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
RMLFF vs RMRDF: Fundamental Ratings
RMLFF
RMRDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8782
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
38
Fair valued
95
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
3649
SMR RATING
1..100
10093
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4436
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
8685
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
1290

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 RMRDF (95). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RMRDF’s over the last 12 months.

RMLFF's Profit vs Risk Rating (36) in the null industry is in the same range as RMRDF (49). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to RMRDF’s over the last 12 months.

RMRDF's SMR Rating (93) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (100). This means that RMRDF’s stock grew similarly to RMLFF’s over the last 12 months.

RMRDF's Price Growth Rating (36) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (44). This means that RMRDF’s stock grew similarly to RMLFF’s over the last 12 months.

RMRDF's P/E Growth Rating (85) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (86). This means that RMRDF’s stock grew similarly to RMLFF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RMLFFRMRDF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
73%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
76%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
74%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
89%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
76%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
77%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
85%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 10 days ago
82%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
80%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
79%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
88%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
84%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
70%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
86%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
RMLFF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RMRDF
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 %
FAPNX13.65N/A
N/A
Fidelity Advisor Healthy Future Z
WMLIX35.90-0.12
-0.33%
Wilmington Large-Cap Strategy Instl
MCCPX21.95-0.08
-0.36%
BlackRock Balanced Investor C
HFQSX6.95-0.03
-0.43%
Janus Henderson Global Equity Income S
TVOAX39.99-0.35
-0.87%
Touchstone Small Cap Value A

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%
-3.80%
GDRZF - RMLFF
20%
Poorly correlated
+6.55%
RMRDF - RMLFF
10%
Poorly correlated
-4.73%
RRDMF - RMLFF
6%
Poorly correlated
-9.09%
RVLGF - RMLFF
4%
Poorly correlated
-3.09%
RMGGF - RMLFF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

RMRDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RMRDF and NSUPF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RMRDF and NSUPF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RMRDF
1D Price
Change %
RMRDF100%
-4.73%
NSUPF - RMRDF
30%
Poorly correlated
-3.62%
CGLCF - RMRDF
21%
Poorly correlated
-0.38%
ORZCF - RMRDF
20%
Poorly correlated
-1.98%
RMLFF - RMRDF
10%
Poorly correlated
-3.80%
RVLGF - RMRDF
0%
Poorly correlated
-3.09%
More