BKHPF
Price
$12.65
Change
-$1.54 (-10.85%)
Updated
Feb 25 closing price
Capitalization
11.78B
LUMB
Price
$12.05
Change
-$0.95 (-7.31%)
Updated
Mar 12 closing price
Capitalization
33.74M
Ad is loading...

BKHPF vs LUMB

Header iconBKHPF vs LUMB Comparison
Open Charts BKHPF vs LUMBBanner chart's image
Bank Hapoalim B.M
Price$12.65
Change-$1.54 (-10.85%)
Volume$2.25K
Capitalization11.78B
Lumbee Guaranty Bank
Price$12.05
Change-$0.95 (-7.31%)
Volume$800
Capitalization33.74M
BKHPF vs LUMB Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BKHPF vs. LUMB commentary
Apr 21, 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 BKHPF is a Hold and LUMB is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Apr 21, 2025
Stock price -- (BKHPF: $12.65 vs. LUMB: $12.05)
Brand notoriety: BKHPF and LUMB are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BKHPF: 119% vs. LUMB: 41%
Market capitalization -- BKHPF: $11.78B vs. LUMB: $33.74M
BKHPF [@Regional Banks] is valued at $11.78B. LUMB’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $33.74M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $5.96B.

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).

BKHPF’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileLUMB’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • BKHPF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
  • LUMB’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, BKHPF is a better buy in the long-term than LUMB.

Price Growth

BKHPF (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while LUMB (@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 +3.11%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.66%, and the average quarterly price growth was +1.78%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+3.11% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
BKHPF($11.8B) has a higher market cap than LUMB($33.7M). LUMB (6.20) and BKHPF (6.13) have similar P/E ratio . BKHPF YTD gains are higher at: 32.322 vs. LUMB (-7.072). LUMB has less debt than BKHPF: LUMB (39K) vs BKHPF (26.4B). BKHPF has higher revenues than LUMB: BKHPF (19.4B) vs LUMB (17.7M).
BKHPFLUMBBKHPF / LUMB
Capitalization11.8B33.7M35,015%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD32.322-7.072-457%
P/E Ratio6.136.2099%
Revenue19.4B17.7M109,605%
Total CashN/A5.08M-
Total Debt26.4B39K67,692,308%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BKHPF: Fundamental Ratings
BKHPF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
57
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
16
SMR RATING
1..100
3
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
40
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
23
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
32

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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
GME26.780.53
+2.02%
GameStop Corp
AAPL196.982.71
+1.39%
Apple
BTC.X85063.414000612.609400
+0.73%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
SPY525.66N/A
N/A
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF
TSLA241.37-0.18
-0.07%
Tesla

BKHPF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that BKHPF and VBNK have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BKHPF and VBNK's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BKHPF
1D Price
Change %
BKHPF100%
N/A
VBNK - BKHPF
32%
Poorly correlated
+15.20%
CRARY - BKHPF
31%
Poorly correlated
+0.77%
CHBAF - BKHPF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FMAO - BKHPF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CIXPF - BKHPF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

LUMB and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, LUMB has been loosely correlated with CRZY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 39% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if LUMB jumps, then CRZY could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LUMB
1D Price
Change %
LUMB100%
N/A
CRZY - LUMB
39%
Loosely correlated
N/A
TYCB - LUMB
37%
Loosely correlated
N/A
MBLU - LUMB
32%
Poorly correlated
-1.66%
BKHPF - LUMB
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LOB - LUMB
20%
Poorly correlated
+1.34%
More