Advertisement
AIMFF vs GBLBY
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 AIMFF is a Hold and GBLBY is a Hold.
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).
AIMFF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGBLBY’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- AIMFF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- GBLBY’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
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.
AIMFF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GBLBY’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).
- AIMFF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
- GBLBY’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
AIMFF (@Chemicals: Specialty) experienced а -3.00% price change this week, while GBLBY (@Investment Managers) price change was -3.05% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Chemicals: Specialty industry was -0.69%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.36%, and the average quarterly price growth was +16.69%.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -1.95%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.07%, and the average quarterly price growth was +39.07%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Chemicals: Specialty (-0.69% weekly)The specialty chemicals sector includes companies that produce chemicals and industrial gases, which are of relatively high-value, often made to customer specifications. Examples of specialty chemicals are electronic chemicals, industrial gases, coatings, adhesives and sealants, industrial and institutional cleaning chemicals. The products are often valued on the basis of their purposes/performances rather than for their composition. Linde Plc, Ecolab Inc., Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., and Dow, Inc. are some of the largest companies making specialty chemicals.
@Investment Managers (-1.95% weekly)Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.
| AIMFF | GBLBY | AIMFF / GBLBY | |
| Capitalization | 208M | 10.7B | 2% |
| EBITDA | N/A | 786M | - |
| Gain YTD | 21.505 | 34.928 | 62% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | 307.91 | - |
| Revenue | 486M | 6.09B | 8% |
| Total Cash | N/A | 3.37B | - |
| Total Debt | 305M | 7.39B | 4% |
AIMFF | GBLBY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 95 | 96 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 68 Overvalued | 11 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 70 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 94 | 92 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 48 | 51 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 54 | 1 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 65 |
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.
GBLBY's Valuation (11) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AIMFF (68). This means that GBLBY’s stock grew somewhat faster than AIMFF’s over the last 12 months.
GBLBY's Profit vs Risk Rating (70) in the null industry is in the same range as AIMFF (100). This means that GBLBY’s stock grew similarly to AIMFF’s over the last 12 months.
GBLBY's SMR Rating (92) in the null industry is in the same range as AIMFF (94). This means that GBLBY’s stock grew similarly to AIMFF’s over the last 12 months.
AIMFF's Price Growth Rating (48) in the null industry is in the same range as GBLBY (51). This means that AIMFF’s stock grew similarly to GBLBY’s over the last 12 months.
GBLBY's P/E Growth Rating (1) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AIMFF (54). This means that GBLBY’s stock grew somewhat faster than AIMFF’s over the last 12 months.
| AIMFF | GBLBY | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 3 days ago 76% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 63% | 3 days ago 82% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 71% | 3 days ago 66% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 64% | 3 days ago 75% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 74% | 3 days ago 56% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 59% | 3 days ago 57% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 26 days ago 64% | 17 days ago 59% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 75% | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 64% | 3 days ago 79% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 49% | 3 days ago 73% |
Advertisement
AIMFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that AIMFF and ONEXF have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that AIMFF and ONEXF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To AIMFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AIMFF | 100% | -0.09% | ||
| ONEXF - AIMFF | 28% Poorly correlated | -0.03% | ||
| FNNCF - AIMFF | 22% Poorly correlated | +10.00% | ||
| SAMG - AIMFF | 21% Poorly correlated | -1.38% | ||
| TETAA - AIMFF | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| FFXXF - AIMFF | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
GBLBY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that GBLBY and PFX have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GBLBY and PFX's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To GBLBY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GBLBY | 100% | N/A | ||
| PFX - GBLBY | 20% Poorly correlated | +0.22% | ||
| AIMFF - GBLBY | 9% Poorly correlated | -0.09% | ||
| HCGI - GBLBY | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| FRMO - GBLBY | 3% Poorly correlated | -0.80% | ||
| GCAAF - GBLBY | 2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||