BCOW vs BYFC
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 BCOW is a Hold and BYFC 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).
BCOW’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileBYFC’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- BCOW’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- BYFC’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
Price Growth
BCOW (@Regional Banks) experienced а -0.10% price change this week, while BYFC (@Regional Banks) price change was +7.46% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +0.23%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.70%, and the average quarterly price growth was +17.76%.
Reported Earning Dates
BCOW is expected to report earnings on Mar 30, 2023.
BYFC is expected to report earnings on Nov 09, 2023.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (+0.23% 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.
| BCOW | BYFC | BCOW / BYFC | |
| Capitalization | 41.7M | 51.1M | 82% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 42.346 | 6.090 | 695% |
| P/E Ratio | 1000.00 | 10.21 | 9,790% |
| Revenue | 12.8M | 34.4M | 37% |
| Total Cash | N/A | 6.19M | - |
| Total Debt | 78.5M | 224M | 35% |
BCOW | BYFC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 18 | 2 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 94 Overvalued | 5 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 94 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 90 | 69 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 42 | 38 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 1 | 19 | |
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.
BYFC's Valuation (5) in the Savings Banks industry is significantly better than the same rating for BCOW (94) in the null industry. This means that BYFC’s stock grew significantly faster than BCOW’s over the last 12 months.
BCOW's Profit vs Risk Rating (94) in the null industry is in the same range as BYFC (100) in the Savings Banks industry. This means that BCOW’s stock grew similarly to BYFC’s over the last 12 months.
BYFC's SMR Rating (69) in the Savings Banks industry is in the same range as BCOW (90) in the null industry. This means that BYFC’s stock grew similarly to BCOW’s over the last 12 months.
BYFC's Price Growth Rating (38) in the Savings Banks industry is in the same range as BCOW (42) in the null industry. This means that BYFC’s stock grew similarly to BCOW’s over the last 12 months.
BCOW's P/E Growth Rating (1) in the null industry is in the same range as BYFC (19) in the Savings Banks industry. This means that BCOW’s stock grew similarly to BYFC’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 (%) |
BCOW and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BCOW and CFBK have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BCOW and CFBK's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BCOW | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCOW | 100% | -0.50% | ||
| CFBK - BCOW | 29% Poorly correlated | -1.88% | ||
| ECBK - BCOW | 26% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PBBK - BCOW | 26% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| MYFW - BCOW | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BFIN - BCOW | 23% Poorly correlated | +3.30% | ||
More | ||||
BYFC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BYFC and CBSH have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BYFC and CBSH's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BYFC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BYFC | 100% | -3.23% | ||
| CBSH - BYFC | 24% Poorly correlated | -0.36% | ||
| HBNC - BYFC | 22% Poorly correlated | +0.16% | ||
| BMRC - BYFC | 22% Poorly correlated | +1.41% | ||
| BCOW - BYFC | 22% Poorly correlated | -0.50% | ||
| HNVR - BYFC | 22% Poorly correlated | -1.36% | ||
More | ||||