ACGBF
Price
$0.69
Change
+$0.06 (+9.52%)
Updated
Oct 8 closing price
Capitalization
327.28B
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
BCSO
Price
$52.00
Change
-$5.00 (-8.77%)
Updated
Aug 14 closing price
Capitalization
79.79M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

ACGBF vs BCSO

Header iconACGBF vs BCSO Comparison
Open Charts ACGBF vs BCSOBanner chart's image
Agricultural Bank of China
Price$0.69
Change+$0.06 (+9.52%)
Volume$5K
Capitalization327.28B
Bancorp Southern Indiana
Price$52.00
Change-$5.00 (-8.77%)
Volume$212
Capitalization79.79M
ACGBF vs BCSO Comparison Chart in %
ACGBF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
BCSO
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
ACGBF vs. BCSO commentary
Feb 04, 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 ACGBF is a Hold and BCSO is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Feb 04, 2026
Stock price -- (ACGBF: $0.67 vs. BCSO: $59.00)
Brand notoriety: ACGBF and BCSO are both not notable
Both companies represent the Major Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: ACGBF: 110% vs. BCSO: 91%
Market capitalization -- ACGBF: $327.28B vs. BCSO: $79.79M
ACGBF [@Major Banks] is valued at $327.28B. BCSO’s [@Major Banks] market capitalization is $79.79M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Major Banks] industry ranges from $848.9B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Major Banks] industry is $146.45B.

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).

ACGBF’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileBCSO’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

ACGBF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while BCSO’s TA Score has 1 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • ACGBF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • BCSO’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 0 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, ACGBF is a better buy in the short-term than BCSO.

Price Growth

ACGBF (@Major Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while BCSO (@Major Banks) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Major Banks industry was +0.93%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.57%, and the average quarterly price growth was +22.63%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Major Banks (+0.93% weekly)

Major banks are among the biggest companies in the world, often times with global reach and market capitalizations in the multi-billions. Large banks often have multiple arms spanning different disciplines, from deposits, to investment banking, to wealth management and insurance. The biggest banks often have key competitive advantages over smaller players in the industry in terms of brand recognition, cost of capital, and efficiency. Think J.P. Morgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
ACGBF($327B) has a higher market cap than BCSO($79.8M). BCSO has higher P/E ratio than ACGBF: BCSO (11.82) vs ACGBF (5.98). BCSO YTD gains are higher at: 0.000 vs. ACGBF (-8.739). ACGBF has higher revenues than BCSO: ACGBF (721B) vs BCSO (39.5M).
ACGBFBCSOACGBF / BCSO
Capitalization327B79.8M409,774%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-8.7390.000-
P/E Ratio5.9811.8251%
Revenue721B39.5M1,825,316%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt3.52TN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
ACGBF vs BCSO: Fundamental Ratings
ACGBF
BCSO
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
3244
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
37
Fair valued
39
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
2320
SMR RATING
1..100
162
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
6051
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3324
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
2547

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.

ACGBF's Valuation (37) in the null industry is in the same range as BCSO (39). This means that ACGBF’s stock grew similarly to BCSO’s over the last 12 months.

BCSO's Profit vs Risk Rating (20) in the null industry is in the same range as ACGBF (23). This means that BCSO’s stock grew similarly to ACGBF’s over the last 12 months.

ACGBF's SMR Rating (1) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BCSO (62). This means that ACGBF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BCSO’s over the last 12 months.

BCSO's Price Growth Rating (51) in the null industry is in the same range as ACGBF (60). This means that BCSO’s stock grew similarly to ACGBF’s over the last 12 months.

BCSO's P/E Growth Rating (24) in the null industry is in the same range as ACGBF (33). This means that BCSO’s stock grew similarly to ACGBF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
ACGBFBCSO
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
58%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
64%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
60%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
51%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
9%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
26%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
10%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
46%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
24%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
11%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
ACGBF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
BCSO
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
KBGGY17.330.53
+3.15%
Kongsberg Gruppen ASA
MFBI11.30N/A
N/A
Monroe Federal Bancorp, Inc.
ISRLF12.80N/A
N/A
Israel Acquisitions Corp.
RICOF8.59N/A
N/A
Ricoh Company Ltd.
NMUCF6.00N/A
N/A
Nomura Co., Ltd.

ACGBF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that ACGBF and ABMRF have been poorly correlated (+6% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that ACGBF and ABMRF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To ACGBF
1D Price
Change %
ACGBF100%
N/A
ABMRF - ACGBF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BACHY - ACGBF
5%
Poorly correlated
-0.95%
ACGBY - ACGBF
2%
Poorly correlated
-1.44%
AGRPF - ACGBF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BCSO - ACGBF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

BCSO and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that BCSO and ACGBY have been poorly correlated (+4% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BCSO and ACGBY's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BCSO
1D Price
Change %
BCSO100%
N/A
ACGBY - BCSO
4%
Poorly correlated
-1.44%
BBVXF - BCSO
0%
Poorly correlated
-3.27%
AGRPF - BCSO
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BACHF - BCSO
-0%
Poorly correlated
-0.52%
BCMXY - BCSO
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More