BCUCY
Price
$10.14
Change
-$2.01 (-16.54%)
Updated
Sep 25 closing price
Capitalization
6.78B
LKFLF
Price
$3.40
Change
-$0.12 (-3.41%)
Updated
Sep 22 closing price
Capitalization
1.83B
Interact to see
Advertisement

BCUCY vs LKFLF

Header iconBCUCY vs LKFLF Comparison
Open Charts BCUCY vs LKFLFBanner chart's image
Brunello Cucinelli S P A
Price$10.14
Change-$2.01 (-16.54%)
Volume$46.71K
Capitalization6.78B
Luk Fook Holdings International
Price$3.40
Change-$0.12 (-3.41%)
Volume$100
Capitalization1.83B
BCUCY vs LKFLF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
BCUCY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
LKFLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BCUCY vs. LKFLF commentary
Sep 27, 2025

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 BCUCY is a Hold and LKFLF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 27, 2025
Stock price -- (BCUCY: $10.14 vs. LKFLF: $3.40)
Brand notoriety: BCUCY and LKFLF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Catalog/Specialty Distribution industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BCUCY: 203% vs. LKFLF: 3%
Market capitalization -- BCUCY: $6.78B vs. LKFLF: $1.83B
BCUCY [@Catalog/Specialty Distribution] is valued at $6.78B. LKFLF’s [@Catalog/Specialty Distribution] market capitalization is $1.83B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Catalog/Specialty Distribution] industry ranges from $295.63B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Catalog/Specialty Distribution] industry is $40.64B.

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).

BCUCY’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileLKFLF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • BCUCY’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • LKFLF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, both BCUCY and LKFLF are a good buy in the long-term.

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.

BCUCY’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while LKFLF’s TA Score has 1 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • BCUCY’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • LKFLF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, BCUCY is a better buy in the short-term than LKFLF.

Price Growth

BCUCY (@Catalog/Specialty Distribution) experienced а -16.06% price change this week, while LKFLF (@Catalog/Specialty Distribution) price change was -3.41% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Catalog/Specialty Distribution industry was -2.26%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.66%, and the average quarterly price growth was +13.51%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Catalog/Specialty Distribution (-2.26% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
BCUCY($6.78B) has a higher market cap than LKFLF($1.83B). BCUCY has higher P/E ratio than LKFLF: BCUCY (44.27) vs LKFLF (14.14). LKFLF YTD gains are higher at: 102.381 vs. BCUCY (-7.018).
BCUCYLKFLFBCUCY / LKFLF
Capitalization6.78B1.83B370%
EBITDA394MN/A-
Gain YTD-7.018102.381-7%
P/E Ratio44.2714.14313%
Revenue1.34BN/A-
Total Cash244MN/A-
Total Debt1.23BN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BCUCY vs LKFLF: Fundamental Ratings
BCUCY
LKFLF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8699
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
84
Overvalued
12
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
2657
SMR RATING
1..100
3873
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5038
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
643
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50n/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.

LKFLF's Valuation (12) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for BCUCY (84). This means that LKFLF’s stock grew significantly faster than BCUCY’s over the last 12 months.

BCUCY's Profit vs Risk Rating (26) in the null industry is in the same range as LKFLF (57). This means that BCUCY’s stock grew similarly to LKFLF’s over the last 12 months.

BCUCY's SMR Rating (38) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LKFLF (73). This means that BCUCY’s stock grew somewhat faster than LKFLF’s over the last 12 months.

LKFLF's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as BCUCY (50). This means that LKFLF’s stock grew similarly to BCUCY’s over the last 12 months.

LKFLF's P/E Growth Rating (3) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BCUCY (64). This means that LKFLF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BCUCY’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BCUCYLKFLF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
57%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
62%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
58%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
70%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
61%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
64%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
56%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
60%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
41%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
74%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
63%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
84%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
69%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
71%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
32%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
BCUCY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
LKFLF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SLVP26.150.32
+1.24%
iShares MSCI Global Silver&Mtls Mnrs ETF
COPJ30.570.32
+1.07%
Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF
KAUG25.88-0.09
-0.35%
Innovator U.S. Small Cp Pwr Buf ETF -Aug
LEXI34.32-0.14
-0.41%
Alexis Practical Tactical ETF
SCHC44.79-0.31
-0.69%
Schwab International Small-Cap Eq ETF™

BCUCY and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BCUCY has been loosely correlated with LVMHF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 46% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BCUCY jumps, then LVMHF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BCUCY
1D Price
Change %
BCUCY100%
-16.57%
LVMHF - BCUCY
46%
Loosely correlated
-1.78%
LVMUY - BCUCY
45%
Loosely correlated
-0.99%
HESAF - BCUCY
44%
Loosely correlated
-0.86%
HESAY - BCUCY
43%
Loosely correlated
-0.84%
PPRUY - BCUCY
43%
Loosely correlated
-1.03%
More

LKFLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that LKFLF and CHDRF have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LKFLF and CHDRF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LKFLF
1D Price
Change %
LKFLF100%
N/A
CHDRF - LKFLF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BCUCY - LKFLF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CJEWY - LKFLF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SWGAY - LKFLF
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SWGNF - LKFLF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More