Advertisement
BRSGF vs CWD
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 Hold and CWD 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).
BRSGF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileCWD’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- BRSGF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- CWD’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.
BRSGF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CWD’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- BRSGF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 3 bearish.
- CWD’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
BRSGF (@Investment Managers) experienced а +10.88% price change this week, while CWD (@Investment Managers) price change was -13.82% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was +1.47%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.44%, and the average quarterly price growth was +7.75%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Investment Managers (+1.47% 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.
| BRSGF | CWD | BRSGF / CWD | |
| Capitalization | 241M | 9.05M | 2,664% |
| EBITDA | N/A | -16.26M | - |
| Gain YTD | 44.615 | 5.645 | 790% |
| P/E Ratio | 4.78 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | N/A | 24.7M | - |
| Total Cash | 12.9M | 10.9M | 118% |
| Total Debt | 31.8M | 62.6M | 51% |
BRSGF | ||
|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 33 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 17 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 60 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 21 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 34 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 94 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 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.
| BRSGF | CWD | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 60% | 2 days ago 86% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 50% | 2 days ago 84% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 57% | 2 days ago 90% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 47% | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 37% | 2 days ago 90% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 31% | 2 days ago 90% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 10 days ago 66% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 90% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 59% | 2 days ago 72% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 50% | 2 days ago 90% |
Advertisement
BRSGF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BRSGF has been loosely correlated with HSDT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 41% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BRSGF jumps, then HSDT could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BRSGF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BRSGF | 100% | +7.43% | ||
| HSDT - BRSGF | 41% Loosely correlated | +7.48% | ||
| TGE - BRSGF | 34% Loosely correlated | -0.71% | ||
| CWD - BRSGF | 31% Poorly correlated | -0.76% | ||
| GECC - BRSGF | 25% Poorly correlated | -0.84% | ||
| GSBD - BRSGF | 23% Poorly correlated | -0.98% | ||
More | ||||
CWD and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CWD and BRSGF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CWD and BRSGF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CWD | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CWD | 100% | -0.76% | ||
| BRSGF - CWD | 31% Poorly correlated | +7.43% | ||
| TGE - CWD | 12% Poorly correlated | -0.71% | ||
| KBDC - CWD | 12% Poorly correlated | -0.48% | ||
| CRBG - CWD | 10% Poorly correlated | -1.57% | ||
| BLK - CWD | 8% Poorly correlated | +0.03% | ||
More | ||||