BPHLF
Price
$1.85
Change
-$0.26 (-12.32%)
Updated
Mar 18 closing price
Capitalization
10.31B
CTYP
Price
$5.30
Change
-$0.09 (-1.67%)
Updated
Jun 26 closing price
Capitalization
22.99M
Interact to see
Advertisement

BPHLF vs CTYP

Header iconBPHLF vs CTYP Comparison
Open Charts BPHLF vs CTYPBanner chart's image
Bank of the Philippine Islands
Price$1.85
Change-$0.26 (-12.32%)
Volume$150
Capitalization10.31B
Community Bankers (PA)
Price$5.30
Change-$0.09 (-1.67%)
Volume$1.35K
Capitalization22.99M
BPHLF vs CTYP Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CTYP
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BPHLF vs. CTYP commentary
Jul 07, 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 BPHLF is a Buy and CTYP is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 07, 2025
Stock price -- (BPHLF: $1.85 vs. CTYP: $5.30)
Brand notoriety: BPHLF and CTYP are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BPHLF: 100% vs. CTYP: 247%
Market capitalization -- BPHLF: $10.31B vs. CTYP: $22.99M
BPHLF [@Regional Banks] is valued at $10.31B. CTYP’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $22.99M. 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 $6.03B.

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).

BPHLF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileCTYP’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CTYP’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • CTYP’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 3 bearish.

Price Growth

BPHLF (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while CTYP (@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 +2.13%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.05%, and the average quarterly price growth was +11.73%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+2.13% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
BPHLF($10.3B) has a higher market cap than CTYP($23M). CTYP YTD gains are higher at: -0.155 vs. BPHLF (-17.778). CTYP has less debt than BPHLF: CTYP (21.1M) vs BPHLF (99.7B). BPHLF has higher revenues than CTYP: BPHLF (125B) vs CTYP (7.13M).
BPHLFCTYPBPHLF / CTYP
Capitalization10.3B23M44,783%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-17.778-0.15511,491%
P/E Ratio11.57N/A-
Revenue125B7.13M1,753,648%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt99.7B21.1M472,512%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BPHLF vs CTYP: Fundamental Ratings
BPHLF
CTYP
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
70
Overvalued
16
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
33100
SMR RATING
1..100
165
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
7679
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
7312
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

CTYP's Valuation (16) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BPHLF (70). This means that CTYP’s stock grew somewhat faster than BPHLF’s over the last 12 months.

BPHLF's Profit vs Risk Rating (33) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CTYP (100). This means that BPHLF’s stock grew significantly faster than CTYP’s over the last 12 months.

BPHLF's SMR Rating (1) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CTYP (65). This means that BPHLF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CTYP’s over the last 12 months.

BPHLF's Price Growth Rating (76) in the null industry is in the same range as CTYP (79). This means that BPHLF’s stock grew similarly to CTYP’s over the last 12 months.

CTYP's P/E Growth Rating (12) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BPHLF (73). This means that CTYP’s stock grew somewhat faster than BPHLF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BPHLFCTYP
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
30%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
40%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
46%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
15%
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
31%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
14%
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
45%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
53%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CTYP
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
CMPO14.850.22
+1.50%
CompoSecure
RMBS65.890.89
+1.37%
Rambus
PXS2.890.02
+0.70%
Pyxis Tankers
AFJKU11.25N/A
N/A
Aimei Health Technology Co Ltd
VSTA4.28-0.02
-0.35%
Vasta Platform Limited

BPHLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BPHLF has been loosely correlated with KGTFY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 56% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BPHLF jumps, then KGTFY could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BPHLF
1D Price
Change %
BPHLF100%
N/A
KGTFY - BPHLF
56%
Loosely correlated
N/A
PONT - BPHLF
47%
Loosely correlated
N/A
HRGG - BPHLF
37%
Loosely correlated
+3.57%
BGKKF - BPHLF
35%
Loosely correlated
N/A
MIFF - BPHLF
34%
Loosely correlated
N/A
More

CTYP and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CTYP and COSO have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CTYP and COSO's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CTYP
1D Price
Change %
CTYP100%
N/A
COSO - CTYP
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NWPP - CTYP
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BPHLF - CTYP
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BGKKF - CTYP
15%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BYLB - CTYP
14%
Poorly correlated
-0.01%
More