Advertisement
AMBBY vs ICCM
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 AMBBY is a Hold and ICCM 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).
AMBBY’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileICCM’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- AMBBY’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- ICCM’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 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.
AMBBY’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while ICCM’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).
- AMBBY’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
- ICCM’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
AMBBY (@Medical/Nursing Services) experienced а -6.94% price change this week, while ICCM (@Medical/Nursing Services) price change was -10.92% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Medical/Nursing Services industry was -0.15%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.26%, and the average quarterly price growth was +24.88%.
Reported Earning Dates
ICCM is expected to report earnings on Nov 25, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Medical/Nursing Services (-0.15% weekly)The medical/nursing services includes companies that provide medical-related services such as ambulance services, dialysis centers, respiratory therapy, blood testing and rehabilitation services. DaVita Inc., Chemed Corporation and Guardant Health, Inc. are examples of companies in this industry.
| AMBBY | ICCM | AMBBY / ICCM | |
| Capitalization | 3.97B | 72.8M | 5,456% |
| EBITDA | 834M | -15.54M | -5,365% |
| Gain YTD | 13.287 | -3.636 | -365% |
| P/E Ratio | 70.62 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 5.83B | 2.79M | 209,329% |
| Total Cash | 640M | 5.38M | 11,889% |
| Total Debt | 554M | 2.37M | 23,376% |
AMBBY | ICCM | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 31 | 3 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 98 Overvalued | 57 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 81 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 77 | 47 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 59 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 85 |
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.
ICCM's Valuation (57) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AMBBY (98). This means that ICCM’s stock grew somewhat faster than AMBBY’s over the last 12 months.
ICCM's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as AMBBY (100). This means that ICCM’s stock grew similarly to AMBBY’s over the last 12 months.
AMBBY's SMR Rating (81) in the null industry is in the same range as ICCM (100). This means that AMBBY’s stock grew similarly to ICCM’s over the last 12 months.
ICCM's Price Growth Rating (47) in the null industry is in the same range as AMBBY (77). This means that ICCM’s stock grew similarly to AMBBY’s over the last 12 months.
AMBBY's P/E Growth Rating (59) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for ICCM (100). This means that AMBBY’s stock grew somewhat faster than ICCM’s over the last 12 months.
| AMBBY | ICCM | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 71% | 1 day ago 90% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 59% | 1 day ago 90% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 74% | 1 day ago 85% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 59% | 1 day ago 83% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 66% | 1 day ago 73% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 72% | 1 day ago 78% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 9 days ago 81% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | 3 days ago 87% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 65% | 1 day ago 90% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 90% |
Advertisement
AMBBY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, AMBBY has been loosely correlated with ICCM. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if AMBBY jumps, then ICCM could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To AMBBY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMBBY | 100% | -1.93% | ||
| ICCM - AMBBY | 35% Loosely correlated | +0.95% | ||
| MDXH - AMBBY | 34% Loosely correlated | -1.67% | ||
| VTAK - AMBBY | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SAFLF - AMBBY | 24% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CLPBY - AMBBY | 23% Poorly correlated | -0.92% | ||
More | ||||
ICCM and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, ICCM has been loosely correlated with AMBBY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if ICCM jumps, then AMBBY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ICCM | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICCM | 100% | +0.95% | ||
| AMBBY - ICCM | 35% Loosely correlated | -1.93% | ||
| JMPHF - ICCM | 31% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SAFLF - ICCM | 28% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PRPH - ICCM | 28% Poorly correlated | -0.72% | ||
| MGRM - ICCM | 23% Poorly correlated | -1.16% | ||
More | ||||