Advertisement
BCUCF vs CHDRF
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 BCUCF is a Hold and CHDRF is a Buy.
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).
BCUCF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCHDRF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- BCUCF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- CHDRF’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.
BCUCF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CHDRF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).
- BCUCF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 2 bearish.
- CHDRF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
BCUCF (@Catalog/Specialty Distribution) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while CHDRF (@Catalog/Specialty Distribution) price change was -2.93% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Catalog/Specialty Distribution industry was +1.77%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +9.84%, and the average quarterly price growth was +5.96%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Catalog/Specialty Distribution (+1.77% weekly)The catalog and specialty distribution industry includes companies that offer retail through mail-order houses, media, online social platforms, mobile apps and other channels outside of brick-and-mortar stores. Several companies in this business partner with retail companies to assist them with marketing, digital solutions, warehousing, and/or other distribution capabilities. In essence, the industry acts as a potential catalyst for retailers/brands to widen their reach among customers. Pinduoduo Inc., Qurate Retail, Inc. and Baozun are some of the major players in this business.
| BCUCF | CHDRF | BCUCF / CHDRF | |
| Capitalization | 7.56B | 100B | 8% |
| EBITDA | N/A | 25.5B | - |
| Gain YTD | 25.111 | -9.099 | -276% |
| P/E Ratio | 49.10 | 18.96 | 259% |
| Revenue | N/A | 82.8B | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | 12.5B | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 49.6B | - |
BCUCF | CHDRF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 49 | 22 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 89 Overvalued | 17 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 11 | 81 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 40 | 99 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 58 | 51 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 63 | 50 | |
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.
CHDRF's Valuation (17) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for BCUCF (89). This means that CHDRF’s stock grew significantly faster than BCUCF’s over the last 12 months.
BCUCF's Profit vs Risk Rating (11) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CHDRF (81). This means that BCUCF’s stock grew significantly faster than CHDRF’s over the last 12 months.
BCUCF's SMR Rating (40) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CHDRF (99). This means that BCUCF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CHDRF’s over the last 12 months.
CHDRF's Price Growth Rating (51) in the null industry is in the same range as BCUCF (58). This means that CHDRF’s stock grew similarly to BCUCF’s over the last 12 months.
CHDRF's P/E Growth Rating (50) in the null industry is in the same range as BCUCF (63). This means that CHDRF’s stock grew similarly to BCUCF’s over the last 12 months.
| BCUCF | CHDRF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 67% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 65% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 21% | 1 day ago 63% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 28% | 1 day ago 69% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 31% | 1 day ago 58% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 34% | 1 day ago 64% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 24 days ago 59% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 33% | 1 day ago 56% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 19% | 1 day ago 50% |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| NXJ | 11.65 | 0.13 | +1.13% |
| Nuveen New Jersey Quality Municipal Income Fund | |||
| AAPW | 39.44 | 0.15 | +0.38% |
| Roundhill AAPL WeeklyPay ETF | |||
| XMMO | 133.66 | 0.42 | +0.32% |
| Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF | |||
| CAAA | 20.65 | 0.05 | +0.24% |
| First Trust AAA CMBS ETF | |||
| CHGX | 26.81 | 0.03 | +0.11% |
| EA SERIES TRUST STANCE SUSTAINABLE BETA ETF | |||
BCUCF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BCUCF and CHDRY have been poorly correlated (+6% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BCUCF and CHDRY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BCUCF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCUCF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CHDRY - BCUCF | 6% Poorly correlated | +3.70% | ||
| BURBY - BCUCF | 5% Poorly correlated | -0.18% | ||
| BCUCY - BCUCF | 5% Poorly correlated | +1.53% | ||
| CHDRF - BCUCF | 5% Poorly correlated | -2.93% | ||
| CFRHF - BCUCF | 4% Poorly correlated | +6.09% | ||
More | ||||
CHDRF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CHDRF has been loosely correlated with LVMUY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 42% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CHDRF jumps, then LVMUY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CHDRF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHDRF | 100% | -2.93% | ||
| LVMUY - CHDRF | 42% Loosely correlated | -0.39% | ||
| LVMHF - CHDRF | 42% Loosely correlated | -0.32% | ||
| SWGAY - CHDRF | 36% Loosely correlated | +3.24% | ||
| HESAY - CHDRF | 35% Loosely correlated | +1.48% | ||
| PPRUY - CHDRF | 32% Poorly correlated | +2.28% | ||
More | ||||