AMGDF vs BCAUF
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 AMGDF is a Hold and BCAUF 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).
AMGDF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileBCAUF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- AMGDF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- BCAUF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
AMGDF (@Motor Vehicles) experienced а -7.68% price change this week, while BCAUF (@Motor Vehicles) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Motor Vehicles industry was -2.46%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.14%, and the average quarterly price growth was -13.87%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Motor Vehicles (-2.46% weekly)Automobiles continue to be arguably the most popular form of passenger travel in the U.S., and major automobile makers have revenues and market capitalizations running into multi-billions. In recent years, the industry has been experiencing some path-breaking innovations like electric vehicles and self-driving technology. While there are long-standing companies like General Motors, Ford, and Toyota Motors operating in this space, there are also emerging/rapidly growing players like Tesla – which has had a major role in the growing popularity of the electric vehicle market. With technological advancements taking steam in the auto space, we’ve also witnessed collaborations (or talks of potential partnerships) of carmakers with tech behemoths like Google’s subsidiary, Waymo.
| AMGDF | BCAUF | AMGDF / BCAUF | |
| Capitalization | 3.75B | 2.81B | 133% |
| EBITDA | 163M | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -54.248 | -24.054 | 226% |
| P/E Ratio | 6.28 | 3.50 | 179% |
| Revenue | 1.52B | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | 408M | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 1.21B | N/A | - |
AMGDF | BCAUF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 82 | 30 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 60 Fair valued | 60 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 98 | 46 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 88 | 63 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 47 | 91 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | n/a |
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.
AMGDF's Valuation (60) in the null industry is in the same range as BCAUF (60). This means that AMGDF’s stock grew similarly to BCAUF’s over the last 12 months.
AMGDF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as BCAUF (100). This means that AMGDF’s stock grew similarly to BCAUF’s over the last 12 months.
BCAUF's SMR Rating (46) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AMGDF (98). This means that BCAUF’s stock grew somewhat faster than AMGDF’s over the last 12 months.
BCAUF's Price Growth Rating (63) in the null industry is in the same range as AMGDF (88). This means that BCAUF’s stock grew similarly to AMGDF’s over the last 12 months.
AMGDF's P/E Growth Rating (47) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BCAUF (91). This means that AMGDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BCAUF’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
AMGDF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, AMGDF has been loosely correlated with ARGGY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 45% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if AMGDF jumps, then ARGGY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To AMGDF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMGDF | 100% | -0.58% | ||
| ARGGY - AMGDF | 45% Loosely correlated | +3.24% | ||
| BAMXF - AMGDF | 10% Poorly correlated | +0.84% | ||
| BCCMY - AMGDF | 10% Poorly correlated | -3.04% | ||
| XPEV - AMGDF | 9% Poorly correlated | +3.63% | ||
| NIO - AMGDF | 6% Poorly correlated | +2.71% | ||
More | ||||
BCAUF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BCAUF and AYRO have been poorly correlated (+11% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BCAUF and AYRO's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BCAUF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCAUF | 100% | N/A | ||
| AYRO - BCAUF | 11% Poorly correlated | -6.40% | ||
| AMGDF - BCAUF | 5% Poorly correlated | -0.58% | ||
| CENN - BCAUF | 4% Poorly correlated | -1.85% | ||
| NIO - BCAUF | 2% Poorly correlated | +2.71% | ||
| BCCMY - BCAUF | 2% Poorly correlated | -3.04% | ||
More | ||||