BAESF vs MTUAF
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 BAESF is a Hold and MTUAF 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).
BAESF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileMTUAF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- BAESF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- MTUAF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
BAESF (@Aerospace & Defense) experienced а -7.65% price change this week, while MTUAF (@Aerospace & Defense) price change was -0.59% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Aerospace & Defense industry was +0.58%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.52%, and the average quarterly price growth was +16.62%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Aerospace & Defense (+0.58% weekly)Aerospace & Defense is one of largest industries in the U.S., mainly comprising the following areas: commercial airliners, military aircraft, missiles, space, and general aviation. Focused heavily on research & development, it is also one of the fastest growing industries. Military aircraft has the largest market share in the industry’s sales, followed by space systems, civil aircraft, and missiles. Aerospace exports, directly and indirectly, support more jobs than the export of any other commodity, according to a study by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Boeing Company, Lockheed Martin Corporation and General Electric Company are some of the most prominent players in this space.
| BAESF | MTUAF | BAESF / MTUAF | |
| Capitalization | 51.3B | 17.6B | 291% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 18.049 | 52.887 | 34% |
| P/E Ratio | 21.63 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | N/A | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | N/A | - |
BAESF | MTUAF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 5 | 12 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 14 Undervalued | 47 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 8 | 66 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 97 | 77 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 51 | 43 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 68 | 92 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 50 |
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.
BAESF's Valuation (14) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MTUAF (47). This means that BAESF’s stock grew somewhat faster than MTUAF’s over the last 12 months.
BAESF's Profit vs Risk Rating (8) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MTUAF (66). This means that BAESF’s stock grew somewhat faster than MTUAF’s over the last 12 months.
MTUAF's SMR Rating (77) in the null industry is in the same range as BAESF (97). This means that MTUAF’s stock grew similarly to BAESF’s over the last 12 months.
MTUAF's Price Growth Rating (43) in the null industry is in the same range as BAESF (51). This means that MTUAF’s stock grew similarly to BAESF’s over the last 12 months.
BAESF's P/E Growth Rating (68) in the null industry is in the same range as MTUAF (92). This means that BAESF’s stock grew similarly to MTUAF’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 (%) |
BAESF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BAESF has been loosely correlated with RNMBY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 41% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BAESF jumps, then RNMBY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BAESF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BAESF | 100% | -3.61% | ||
| RNMBY - BAESF | 41% Loosely correlated | -1.61% | ||
| THLLY - BAESF | 39% Loosely correlated | -2.91% | ||
| MTUAY - BAESF | 31% Poorly correlated | -0.18% | ||
| RNMBF - BAESF | 31% Poorly correlated | -2.75% | ||
| RYCEY - BAESF | 30% Poorly correlated | -3.47% | ||
More | ||||
MTUAF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MTUAF has been loosely correlated with MTUAY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 45% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MTUAF jumps, then MTUAY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MTUAF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MTUAF | 100% | +3.25% | ||
| MTUAY - MTUAF | 45% Loosely correlated | -0.18% | ||
| BAESF - MTUAF | 27% Poorly correlated | -3.61% | ||
| SAFRF - MTUAF | 24% Poorly correlated | +3.08% | ||
| OBTEF - MTUAF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| NSKFF - MTUAF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||