BCAL vs CCRDF
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 BCAL is a Buy and CCRDF 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).
BCAL’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCCRDF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- BCAL’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- CCRDF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 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.
BCAL’s TA Score shows that 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- BCAL’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
BCAL (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while CCRDF (@Regional Banks) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -0.87%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.98%, and the average quarterly price growth was +10.06%.
Reported Earning Dates
BCAL is expected to report earnings on May 05, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (-0.87% weekly)Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.
| BCAL | CCRDF | BCAL / CCRDF | |
| Capitalization | 275M | 5.59B | 5% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -1.451 | -4.884 | 30% |
| P/E Ratio | 10.54 | 12.48 | 84% |
| Revenue | 97.5M | 268B | 0% |
| Total Cash | N/A | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 115M | 2.28T | 0% |
BCAL | CCRDF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 6 | 49 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 81 Overvalued | 35 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 39 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 50 | 1 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 50 | 51 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 2 | 67 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 30 |
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.
CCRDF's Valuation (35) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BCAL (81). This means that CCRDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BCAL’s over the last 12 months.
BCAL's Profit vs Risk Rating (39) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CCRDF (100). This means that BCAL’s stock grew somewhat faster than CCRDF’s over the last 12 months.
CCRDF's SMR Rating (1) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BCAL (50). This means that CCRDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BCAL’s over the last 12 months.
BCAL's Price Growth Rating (50) in the null industry is in the same range as CCRDF (51). This means that BCAL’s stock grew similarly to CCRDF’s over the last 12 months.
BCAL's P/E Growth Rating (2) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CCRDF (67). This means that BCAL’s stock grew somewhat faster than CCRDF’s over the last 12 months.
| BCAL | |
|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 56% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 41% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 47% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 37% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 43% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 37% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 18 days ago 58% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 61% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 57% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 30% |
BCAL and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BCAL has been closely correlated with CFB. These tickers have moved in lockstep 67% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if BCAL jumps, then CFB could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BCAL | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCAL | 100% | -0.31% | ||
| CFB - BCAL | 67% Closely correlated | +1.04% | ||
| CCB - BCAL | 63% Loosely correlated | +2.12% | ||
| CARE - BCAL | 63% Loosely correlated | -1.56% | ||
| SFST - BCAL | 62% Loosely correlated | +0.28% | ||
| TCBI - BCAL | 62% Loosely correlated | +1.47% | ||
More | ||||
CCRDF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CCRDF and SUTNY have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CCRDF and SUTNY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CCRDF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CCRDF | 100% | N/A | ||
| SUTNY - CCRDF | 32% Poorly correlated | +1.39% | ||
| LLAZF - CCRDF | 30% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| MFG - CCRDF | 29% Poorly correlated | +1.92% | ||
| BCAL - CCRDF | 28% Poorly correlated | -0.31% | ||
| DSBX - CCRDF | 23% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||