RMLFF
Price
$0.83
Change
-$0.05 (-5.68%)
Updated
Feb 3 closing price
Capitalization
513.27M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
RMRDF
Price
$0.57
Change
+$0.17 (+42.50%)
Updated
Feb 3 closing price
Capitalization
241.66M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

RMLFF vs RMRDF

Header iconRMLFF vs RMRDF Comparison
Open Charts RMLFF vs RMRDFBanner chart's image
Rusoro Mining
Price$0.83
Change-$0.05 (-5.68%)
Volume$268.89K
Capitalization513.27M
Radisson Mining Resources
Price$0.57
Change+$0.17 (+42.50%)
Volume$690.51K
Capitalization241.66M
RMLFF vs RMRDF Comparison Chart in %
RMLFF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
RMRDF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
RMLFF vs. RMRDF commentary
Feb 05, 2026

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
Feb 05, 2026
Stock price -- (RMLFF: $0.83 vs. RMRDF: $0.57)
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: 42% vs. RMRDF: 77%
Market capitalization -- RMLFF: $513.27M vs. RMRDF: $241.66M
RMLFF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $513.27M. RMRDF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $241.66M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Precious Metals] industry ranges from $146.8B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Precious Metals] industry is $4.5B.

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 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish while RMRDF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • RMLFF’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • RMRDF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 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 -12.25% price change this week, while RMRDF (@Precious Metals) price change was +4.97% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Precious Metals industry was +6.43%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +17.62%, and the average quarterly price growth was +95.61%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Precious Metals (+6.43% 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($513M) has a higher market cap than RMRDF($242M). RMLFF YTD gains are higher at: 22.059 vs. RMRDF (-11.440). RMRDF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -1.95M vs. RMLFF (-54.8M). RMRDF has more cash in the bank: 12.9M vs. RMLFF (1.17M). RMLFF (0) and RMRDF (0) have equivalent revenues.
RMLFFRMRDFRMLFF / RMRDF
Capitalization513M242M212%
EBITDA-54.8M-1.95M2,816%
Gain YTD22.059-11.440-193%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue00-
Total Cash1.17M12.9M9%
Total Debt88.1MN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
RMLFF vs RMRDF: Fundamental Ratings
RMLFF
RMRDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
957
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
34
Fair valued
95
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
4245
SMR RATING
1..100
10091
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4241
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
8885
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
1150

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 (34) 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 (42) in the null industry is in the same range as RMRDF (45). This means that RMLFF’s stock grew similarly to RMRDF’s over the last 12 months.

RMRDF's SMR Rating (91) 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 (41) in the null industry is in the same range as RMLFF (42). 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 (88). 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
76%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
87%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
85%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
88%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
77%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
86%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
71%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
89%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 15 days ago
81%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Bearish Trend 10 days ago
87%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
77%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
85%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
73%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
RMLFF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
RMRDF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
CEMDX18.370.52
+2.91%
Cullen Emerging Markets High Div Retail
TWEIX8.930.09
+1.02%
American Century Equity Income Inv
FAPLX14.05N/A
N/A
Fidelity Advisor Healthy Future M
FICGX13.94-0.21
-1.48%
Cantor Fitzgerald Large Cap Fcs Cl A
ILGJX17.86-0.36
-1.98%
Columbia Integrated Large Cap Gr Ins 3

RMLFF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RMLFF and AUGO have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RMLFF and AUGO's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RMLFF
1D Price
Change %
RMLFF100%
-2.69%
AUGO - RMLFF
29%
Poorly correlated
+5.63%
GDRZF - RMLFF
22%
Poorly correlated
-9.72%
GRCAF - RMLFF
20%
Poorly correlated
-3.85%
RMRDF - RMLFF
9%
Poorly correlated
+6.54%
RMLRF - RMLFF
4%
Poorly correlated
+2.24%
More

RMRDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RMRDF and NSUPF have been poorly correlated (+29% 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%
+6.54%
NSUPF - RMRDF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IAUX - RMRDF
21%
Poorly correlated
+8.33%
PAAS - RMRDF
21%
Poorly correlated
+5.67%
CGLCF - RMRDF
21%
Poorly correlated
+4.52%
EQX - RMRDF
21%
Poorly correlated
+6.78%
More