GGA.V Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Karnalyte Resources, Inc. has a net margin of -128.76% compared to Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s net margin of --. Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s return on equity of -- beat Karnalyte Resources, Inc.'s return on equity of -22.71%.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Karnalyte Resources, Inc. has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has higher upside potential than Karnalyte Resources, Inc., analysts believe Goldgroup Mining, Inc. is more attractive than Karnalyte Resources, Inc..

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a beta of -0.753, which suggesting that the stock is 175.335% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Karnalyte Resources, Inc. has a beta of 1.120, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 11.955%.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Karnalyte Resources, Inc. offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Goldgroup Mining, Inc. pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Karnalyte Resources, Inc. pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. quarterly revenues are $5.1M, which are larger than Karnalyte Resources, Inc. quarterly revenues of --. Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s net income of -$6.6M is lower than Karnalyte Resources, Inc.'s net income of -$509K. Notably, Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Karnalyte Resources, Inc.'s PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Goldgroup Mining, Inc. is 11.06x versus -- for Karnalyte Resources, Inc.. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Lake Victoria Gold Ltd. has a net margin of -128.76% compared to Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s net margin of --. Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s return on equity of -- beat Lake Victoria Gold Ltd.'s return on equity of -30.12%.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Lake Victoria Gold Ltd. has an analysts' consensus of $0.50 which suggests that it could grow by 72.41%. Given that Lake Victoria Gold Ltd. has higher upside potential than Goldgroup Mining, Inc., analysts believe Lake Victoria Gold Ltd. is more attractive than Goldgroup Mining, Inc..

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a beta of -0.753, which suggesting that the stock is 175.335% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Lake Victoria Gold Ltd. has a beta of 0.760, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 24.036%.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Lake Victoria Gold Ltd. offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Goldgroup Mining, Inc. pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Lake Victoria Gold Ltd. pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. quarterly revenues are $5.1M, which are larger than Lake Victoria Gold Ltd. quarterly revenues of --. Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s net income of -$6.6M is lower than Lake Victoria Gold Ltd.'s net income of -$1.2M. Notably, Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Lake Victoria Gold Ltd.'s PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Goldgroup Mining, Inc. is 11.06x versus -- for Lake Victoria Gold Ltd.. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Nutrien Ltd. has a net margin of -128.76% compared to Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s net margin of 10.86%. Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s return on equity of -- beat Nutrien Ltd.'s return on equity of 9.16%.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Nutrien Ltd. has an analysts' consensus of $101.07 which suggests that it could fall by -0.6%. Given that Nutrien Ltd. has higher upside potential than Goldgroup Mining, Inc., analysts believe Nutrien Ltd. is more attractive than Goldgroup Mining, Inc..

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a beta of -0.753, which suggesting that the stock is 175.335% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Nutrien Ltd. has a beta of 1.109, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 10.899%.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Nutrien Ltd. offers a yield of 2.99% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.75 per share. Goldgroup Mining, Inc. pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Nutrien Ltd. pays out 46.58% of its earnings as a dividend. Nutrien Ltd.'s payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. quarterly revenues are $5.1M, which are smaller than Nutrien Ltd. quarterly revenues of $7.4B. Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s net income of -$6.6M is lower than Nutrien Ltd.'s net income of $808.7M. Notably, Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Nutrien Ltd.'s PE ratio is 15.74x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Goldgroup Mining, Inc. is 11.06x versus 1.32x for Nutrien Ltd.. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Skeena Resources Ltd. has a net margin of -128.76% compared to Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s net margin of --. Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s return on equity of -- beat Skeena Resources Ltd.'s return on equity of -112.49%.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Skeena Resources Ltd. has an analysts' consensus of $47.40 which suggests that it could fall by -0.86%. Given that Skeena Resources Ltd. has higher upside potential than Goldgroup Mining, Inc., analysts believe Skeena Resources Ltd. is more attractive than Goldgroup Mining, Inc..

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a beta of -0.753, which suggesting that the stock is 175.335% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Skeena Resources Ltd. has a beta of 2.034, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 103.426%.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Skeena Resources Ltd. offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Goldgroup Mining, Inc. pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Skeena Resources Ltd. pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Goldgroup Mining, Inc. quarterly revenues are $5.1M, which are larger than Skeena Resources Ltd. quarterly revenues of --. Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s net income of -$6.6M is higher than Skeena Resources Ltd.'s net income of -$36.8M. Notably, Goldgroup Mining, Inc.'s price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Skeena Resources Ltd.'s PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Goldgroup Mining, Inc. is 11.06x versus -- for Skeena Resources Ltd.. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.