Advertisement
BLFS vs CDNA
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 BLFS is a Hold and CDNA 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).
BLFS’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCDNA’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- BLFS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- CDNA’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 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.
BLFS’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CDNA’s TA Score has 6 bullish TA indicator(s).
- BLFS’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 6 bearish.
- CDNA’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
BLFS (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) experienced а -4.41% price change this week, while CDNA (@Medical Specialties) price change was +7.51% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pharmaceuticals: Other industry was -0.82%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.73%, and the average quarterly price growth was +0.04%.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Medical Specialties industry was +4.28%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +5.40%, and the average quarterly price growth was +46.39%.
Reported Earning Dates
BLFS is expected to report earnings on Mar 12, 2026.
CDNA is expected to report earnings on Mar 04, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pharmaceuticals: Other (-0.82% weekly)Pharmaceuticals (Other) comprise companies that are involved in the discovery, development or manufacturing of therapeutic and preventative medicines. They often collaborate with or acquire other pharmaceutical/healthcare firms. Examples of companies in this segment include Bausch Health Companies Inc., Icon Plc and Perrigo Company Plc.
@Medical Specialties (+4.28% weekly)Medical specialties are companies that make equipment used by the health care industry. Equipment manufactured and distributed by these companies include dialysis machines, blood analysis equipment, surgical equipment, dental instruments, and diagnostic tools, among other items. Large companies typically aim to produce and distribute high-quality products across a broad market spectrum. Smaller firms are more likely to specialize in a particular market segment. Due to the industry’s close association with medical treatments, they typically have low sensitivity to macroeconomic fluctuations. Within this industry, Abbott Laboratories, Medtronic Plc and Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. are some of the companies with multi-billion market capitalizations in the U.S. stock markets.
| BLFS | CDNA | BLFS / CDNA | |
| Capitalization | 1.17B | 1.05B | 112% |
| EBITDA | -14.25M | -9.33M | 153% |
| Gain YTD | 0.455 | 7.856 | 6% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | 15.88 | - |
| Revenue | 100M | 358M | 28% |
| Total Cash | 79M | 194M | 41% |
| Total Debt | 20.7M | 27.6M | 75% |
BLFS | CDNA | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 53 | 69 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 99 Overvalued | 91 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 90 | 40 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 61 | 42 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 15 | 85 | |
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.
CDNA's Valuation (91) in the Medical Specialties industry is in the same range as BLFS (99). This means that CDNA’s stock grew similarly to BLFS’s over the last 12 months.
CDNA's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the Medical Specialties industry is in the same range as BLFS (100). This means that CDNA’s stock grew similarly to BLFS’s over the last 12 months.
CDNA's SMR Rating (40) in the Medical Specialties industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BLFS (90). This means that CDNA’s stock grew somewhat faster than BLFS’s over the last 12 months.
CDNA's Price Growth Rating (42) in the Medical Specialties industry is in the same range as BLFS (61). This means that CDNA’s stock grew similarly to BLFS’s over the last 12 months.
BLFS's P/E Growth Rating (15) in the Medical Specialties industry is significantly better than the same rating for CDNA (85). This means that BLFS’s stock grew significantly faster than CDNA’s over the last 12 months.
| BLFS | CDNA | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 87% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 83% | 2 days ago 87% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 85% | 2 days ago 78% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 82% | 2 days ago 82% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 85% | 2 days ago 83% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 85% | 2 days ago 81% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 29 days ago 75% | 11 days ago 81% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 84% | 7 days ago 88% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 85% | 2 days ago 83% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 78% | 2 days ago 86% |
Advertisement
BLFS and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BLFS has been loosely correlated with RGEN. These tickers have moved in lockstep 56% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BLFS jumps, then RGEN could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BLFS | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLFS | 100% | +1.63% | ||
| RGEN - BLFS | 56% Loosely correlated | -3.16% | ||
| RVTY - BLFS | 51% Loosely correlated | +1.25% | ||
| A - BLFS | 50% Loosely correlated | -0.27% | ||
| AZTA - BLFS | 48% Loosely correlated | +2.60% | ||
| DHR - BLFS | 47% Loosely correlated | +1.01% | ||
More | ||||
CDNA and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CDNA has been loosely correlated with NTRA. These tickers have moved in lockstep 43% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CDNA jumps, then NTRA could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CDNA | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CDNA | 100% | +0.64% | ||
| NTRA - CDNA | 43% Loosely correlated | +0.55% | ||
| VCYT - CDNA | 42% Loosely correlated | -1.39% | ||
| BLFS - CDNA | 38% Loosely correlated | +1.63% | ||
| ABT - CDNA | 37% Loosely correlated | +0.56% | ||
| TWST - CDNA | 35% Loosely correlated | -0.47% | ||
More | ||||