BRSGF
Price
$6.00
Change
+$0.40 (+7.14%)
Updated
Sep 19 closing price
Capitalization
240.88M
CSWC
Price
$22.34
Change
-$0.19 (-0.84%)
Updated
Sep 26 closing price
Capitalization
1.24B
35 days until earnings call
Interact to see
Advertisement

BRSGF vs CSWC

Header iconBRSGF vs CSWC Comparison
Open Charts BRSGF vs CSWCBanner chart's image
Queens Rd Cap Invt
Price$6.00
Change+$0.40 (+7.14%)
Volume$100
Capitalization240.88M
Capital Southwest
Price$22.34
Change-$0.19 (-0.84%)
Volume$520.11K
Capitalization1.24B
BRSGF vs CSWC Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
BRSGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
CSWC
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BRSGF vs. CSWC commentary
Sep 29, 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 BRSGF is a Buy and CSWC is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 29, 2025
Stock price -- (BRSGF: $6.00 vs. CSWC: $22.34)
Brand notoriety: BRSGF and CSWC are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BRSGF: 67% vs. CSWC: 92%
Market capitalization -- BRSGF: $240.88M vs. CSWC: $1.24B
BRSGF [@Investment Managers] is valued at $240.88M. CSWC’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $1.24B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $179.08B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $7.43B.

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).

BRSGF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCSWC’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

BRSGF’s TA Score shows that 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CSWC’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

BRSGF (@Investment Managers) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while CSWC (@Investment Managers) price change was -3.33% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -1.95%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.07%, and the average quarterly price growth was +39.07%.

Reported Earning Dates

CSWC is expected to report earnings on Nov 03, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (-1.95% weekly)

Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CSWC($1.24B) has a higher market cap than BRSGF($241M). CSWC has higher P/E ratio than BRSGF: CSWC (13.62) vs BRSGF (4.78). BRSGF YTD gains are higher at: 13.208 vs. CSWC (11.808). BRSGF has less debt than CSWC: BRSGF (31.8M) vs CSWC (926M).
BRSGFCSWCBRSGF / CSWC
Capitalization241M1.24B19%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD13.20811.808112%
P/E Ratio4.7813.6235%
RevenueN/AN/A-
Total Cash12.9MN/A-
Total Debt31.8M926M3%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BRSGF vs CSWC: Fundamental Ratings
BRSGF
CSWC
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
19
Undervalued
27
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
6920
SMR RATING
1..100
9538
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3455
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9453
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5550

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.

BRSGF's Valuation (19) in the null industry is in the same range as CSWC (27) in the Investment Managers industry. This means that BRSGF’s stock grew similarly to CSWC’s over the last 12 months.

CSWC's Profit vs Risk Rating (20) in the Investment Managers industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BRSGF (69) in the null industry. This means that CSWC’s stock grew somewhat faster than BRSGF’s over the last 12 months.

CSWC's SMR Rating (38) in the Investment Managers industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BRSGF (95) in the null industry. This means that CSWC’s stock grew somewhat faster than BRSGF’s over the last 12 months.

BRSGF's Price Growth Rating (34) in the null industry is in the same range as CSWC (55) in the Investment Managers industry. This means that BRSGF’s stock grew similarly to CSWC’s over the last 12 months.

CSWC's P/E Growth Rating (53) in the Investment Managers industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BRSGF (94) in the null industry. This means that CSWC’s stock grew somewhat faster than BRSGF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BRSGFCSWC
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
47%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
54%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
47%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
47%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
57%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
37%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
49%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
34%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
43%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
66%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 15 days ago
51%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
48%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
61%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
BRSGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
CSWC
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
BMSLX15.440.17
+1.11%
MFS Blended Research Mid Cap Eq I
UBVSX85.700.94
+1.11%
Undiscovered Managers Behavioral Val I
RVACX20.620.22
+1.08%
Victory RS Value C
RGSAX33.510.16
+0.48%
Virtus KAR Global Small-Cap A
AGIZX89.120.34
+0.38%
Alger Growth & Income Z

BRSGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BRSGF has been loosely correlated with TGE. These tickers have moved in lockstep 50% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BRSGF jumps, then TGE could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BRSGF
1D Price
Change %
BRSGF100%
N/A
TGE - BRSGF
50%
Loosely correlated
-1.38%
HTGC - BRSGF
48%
Loosely correlated
+0.05%
CWD - BRSGF
31%
Poorly correlated
-6.18%
ARCC - BRSGF
28%
Poorly correlated
-0.49%
CSWC - BRSGF
26%
Poorly correlated
-0.84%
More

CSWC and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CSWC has been closely correlated with PFLT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 77% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if CSWC jumps, then PFLT could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CSWC
1D Price
Change %
CSWC100%
-0.84%
PFLT - CSWC
77%
Closely correlated
-0.97%
SLRC - CSWC
76%
Closely correlated
-0.64%
PNNT - CSWC
76%
Closely correlated
-0.60%
OBDC - CSWC
76%
Closely correlated
-0.97%
ARCC - CSWC
75%
Closely correlated
-0.49%
More