Advertisement
BPCGF vs IBWC
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 BPCGF is a Hold and IBWC 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).
BPCGF’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileIBWC’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- BPCGF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
- IBWC’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.
BPCGF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while IBWC’s TA Score has 1 bullish TA indicator(s).
- BPCGF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 2 bearish.
- IBWC’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 0 bearish.
Price Growth
BPCGF (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while IBWC (@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 +0.38%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.97%, and the average quarterly price growth was +13.09%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (+0.38% 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.
| BPCGF | IBWC | BPCGF / IBWC | |
| Capitalization | 12.3B | 23.9M | 51,464% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 101.357 | -11.377 | -891% |
| P/E Ratio | 12.87 | 25.69 | 50% |
| Revenue | 3.82B | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 6.92B | N/A | - |
BPCGF | IBWC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 71 Overvalued | 80 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 2 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 9 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 39 | 77 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 10 | 23 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 55 |
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.
BPCGF's Valuation (71) in the null industry is in the same range as IBWC (80). This means that BPCGF’s stock grew similarly to IBWC’s over the last 12 months.
BPCGF's Profit vs Risk Rating (2) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for IBWC (100). This means that BPCGF’s stock grew significantly faster than IBWC’s over the last 12 months.
BPCGF's SMR Rating (9) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for IBWC (100). This means that BPCGF’s stock grew significantly faster than IBWC’s over the last 12 months.
BPCGF's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for IBWC (77). This means that BPCGF’s stock grew somewhat faster than IBWC’s over the last 12 months.
BPCGF's P/E Growth Rating (10) in the null industry is in the same range as IBWC (23). This means that BPCGF’s stock grew similarly to IBWC’s over the last 12 months.
| BPCGF | IBWC | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 52% | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | 3 days ago 29% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 38% | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 44% | 3 days ago 24% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 45% | 3 days ago 21% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 45% | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 50% | N/A |
Advertisement
BPCGF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BPCGF has been loosely correlated with MZTFF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 39% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BPCGF jumps, then MZTFF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BPCGF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BPCGF | 100% | N/A | ||
| MZTFF - BPCGF | 39% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| UNBK - BPCGF | 38% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| IBWC - BPCGF | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HBIA - BPCGF | 24% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BOTJ - BPCGF | 24% Poorly correlated | +0.50% | ||
More | ||||
IBWC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, IBWC has been loosely correlated with SWZNF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 42% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if IBWC jumps, then SWZNF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To IBWC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IBWC | 100% | N/A | ||
| SWZNF - IBWC | 42% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| CHMG - IBWC | 36% Loosely correlated | -2.93% | ||
| MCB - IBWC | 28% Poorly correlated | -0.67% | ||
| FMBL - IBWC | 25% Poorly correlated | +0.23% | ||
| BPCGF - IBWC | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||