BASIC NOTES

Uranium Companies

There are very few pure uranium companies. Most companies, especially the small exploration type, are active in more than the uranium industry. This blog makes no attempt to guage the percentage of a companies activity that are related to the finding, mining or processing of uraniun. They all do, however, have some uranium activities (to the best of our review).

Merv's Uranium Indices

I have developed two Uranium Indices. They each have the same component stocks but are calculated using different methodologies. My weekly Index is based upon the average weekly performance of the component stocks. My daily Index is based upon the daily average of the component stocks open, high, low and close prices along with the daily average volume of all component stocks.

Click on the chart or table to enlage the view.



05 July 2010

Merv's Daily Commentary 05 July 2010


After The Close, 05 Jul 2010

Merv’s Daily Uranium Index
Market Data

Open: 140.30
High: 141.51
Low: 136.71
Close: 138.58
Volume: 1469

Note that the volume is an average volume of round lot sales for the 50 component stocks. For total volume, multiply by 5000.

Uranium was up a buck last week but it sure didn’t do the stocks any good. New reaction lows in the Daily Index but the New York market was closed for Independence Celebrations and trading was very light, cousing volatility in prices that did trade.

The Merv’s Daily Uranium Index closed lower by 1.69 points or 1.20%. There were 3 winners, 26 losers and a whole pile of sleepers (21 with 9 of those not traded on the U.S. market). Cameco lost 2.4%, Extract was a sleeper, Fronteer lost 2.4%, Paladin lost 1.6% and Uranium One lost 0.4%. The best of the 3 winners was Quest Uranium with a gain of 13.0% while the loser of the bunch was Xemplar Energy woth a loss of 15.8%. Market Vectors Nuclear Energy ETF did not trade.

Indicators continue lower so the intermediate and short term ratings remain BEARISH.

I’ll stick with the lateral direction as the one with the least resistance.

No comments: