SVGAF
Price
$0.06
Change
-$0.06 (-50.00%)
Updated
Jun 27 closing price
Capitalization
3.66M
ZMPLF
Price
$7.79
Change
-$0.50 (-6.03%)
Updated
Jun 3 closing price
Capitalization
1.89B
Interact to see
Advertisement

SVGAF vs ZMPLF

Header iconSVGAF vs ZMPLF Comparison
Open Charts SVGAF vs ZMPLFBanner chart's image
Silver Grail Resources
Price$0.06
Change-$0.06 (-50.00%)
Volume$31.3K
Capitalization3.66M
Zimplats Holdings
Price$7.79
Change-$0.50 (-6.03%)
Volume$1.33K
Capitalization1.89B
SVGAF vs ZMPLF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
SVGAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
ZMPLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
SVGAF vs. ZMPLF 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 SVGAF is a Hold and ZMPLF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jun 30, 2025
Stock price -- (SVGAF: $0.06 vs. ZMPLF: $7.79)
Brand notoriety: SVGAF and ZMPLF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Precious Metals industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: SVGAF: 518% vs. ZMPLF: 155%
Market capitalization -- SVGAF: $3.66M vs. ZMPLF: $1.89B
SVGAF [@Precious Metals] is valued at $3.66M. ZMPLF’s [@Precious Metals] market capitalization is $1.89B. 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).

SVGAF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileZMPLF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • SVGAF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • ZMPLF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, ZMPLF is a better buy in the long-term than SVGAF.

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.

SVGAF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while ZMPLF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

SVGAF (@Precious Metals) experienced а +11.11% price change this week, while ZMPLF (@Precious Metals) price change was 0.00% 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
ZMPLF($1.89B) has a higher market cap than SVGAF($3.66M). SVGAF YTD gains are higher at: 100.000 vs. ZMPLF (-14.583). ZMPLF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 660M vs. SVGAF (-39.87K). ZMPLF has more cash in the bank: 378M vs. SVGAF (237K). ZMPLF has higher revenues than SVGAF: ZMPLF (1.2B) vs SVGAF (0).
SVGAFZMPLFSVGAF / ZMPLF
Capitalization3.66M1.89B0%
EBITDA-39.87K660M-0%
Gain YTD100.000-14.583-686%
P/E RatioN/A5.38-
Revenue01.2B-
Total Cash237K378M0%
Total DebtN/A734K-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
SVGAF vs ZMPLF: Fundamental Ratings
SVGAF
ZMPLF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
83
Overvalued
3
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10082
SMR RATING
1..100
9489
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3663
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9928
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
8550

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.

ZMPLF's Valuation (3) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for SVGAF (83). This means that ZMPLF’s stock grew significantly faster than SVGAF’s over the last 12 months.

ZMPLF's Profit vs Risk Rating (82) in the null industry is in the same range as SVGAF (100). This means that ZMPLF’s stock grew similarly to SVGAF’s over the last 12 months.

ZMPLF's SMR Rating (89) in the null industry is in the same range as SVGAF (94). This means that ZMPLF’s stock grew similarly to SVGAF’s over the last 12 months.

SVGAF's Price Growth Rating (36) in the null industry is in the same range as ZMPLF (63). This means that SVGAF’s stock grew similarly to ZMPLF’s over the last 12 months.

ZMPLF's P/E Growth Rating (28) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for SVGAF (99). This means that ZMPLF’s stock grew significantly faster than SVGAF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
SVGAFZMPLF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
67%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
36%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
76%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
77%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
50%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
73%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
44%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
64%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
39%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
62%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
35%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
79%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
33%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
43%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
SVGAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
ZMPLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
PBBK18.790.79
+4.39%
PB Bankshares
NRP94.301.24
+1.33%
Natural Resource Partners LP
LNC34.570.05
+0.14%
Lincoln National Corp
PANW200.57-1.77
-0.87%
Palo Alto Networks Inc
NOTV1.70-0.14
-7.61%
Inotiv

SVGAF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SVGAF has been loosely correlated with EREPF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if SVGAF jumps, then EREPF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SVGAF
1D Price
Change %
SVGAF100%
-50.00%
EREPF - SVGAF
36%
Loosely correlated
-16.88%
NPTLF - SVGAF
36%
Loosely correlated
N/A
ZMPLF - SVGAF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
STPGF - SVGAF
8%
Poorly correlated
-4.11%
SSVFF - SVGAF
5%
Poorly correlated
-3.36%
More

ZMPLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that ZMPLF and NPTLF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that ZMPLF and NPTLF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To ZMPLF
1D Price
Change %
ZMPLF100%
N/A
NPTLF - ZMPLF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
EMAUF - ZMPLF
24%
Poorly correlated
+1.09%
CYPMF - ZMPLF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SVGAF - ZMPLF
21%
Poorly correlated
-50.00%
RDEXF - ZMPLF
21%
Poorly correlated
-2.95%
More