Advertisement
CGBD vs MRCC
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 CGBD is a Buy and MRCC 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).
CGBD’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMRCC’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- CGBD’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- MRCC’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 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.
CGBD’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MRCC’s TA Score has 6 bullish TA indicator(s).
- CGBD’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
- MRCC’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
CGBD (@Investment Managers) experienced а -5.46% price change this week, while MRCC (@Investment Managers) price change was -3.63% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -2.41%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.79%, and the average quarterly price growth was +8.86%.
Reported Earning Dates
CGBD is expected to report earnings on Feb 24, 2026.
MRCC is expected to report earnings on Mar 04, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Investment Managers (-2.41% 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.
| CGBD | MRCC | CGBD / MRCC | |
| Capitalization | 859M | 138M | 622% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -5.685 | 0.157 | -3,621% |
| P/E Ratio | 10.16 | 73.33 | 14% |
| Revenue | 84.2M | 981K | 8,583% |
| Total Cash | 22.7M | 5.32M | 426% |
| Total Debt | 1.31B | 211M | 619% |
CGBD | MRCC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 57 | 68 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 3 Undervalued | 5 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 45 | 55 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 42 | 89 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 62 | 60 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 56 | 5 | |
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.
CGBD's Valuation (3) in the null industry is in the same range as MRCC (5). This means that CGBD’s stock grew similarly to MRCC’s over the last 12 months.
CGBD's Profit vs Risk Rating (45) in the null industry is in the same range as MRCC (55). This means that CGBD’s stock grew similarly to MRCC’s over the last 12 months.
CGBD's SMR Rating (42) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MRCC (89). This means that CGBD’s stock grew somewhat faster than MRCC’s over the last 12 months.
MRCC's Price Growth Rating (60) in the null industry is in the same range as CGBD (62). This means that MRCC’s stock grew similarly to CGBD’s over the last 12 months.
MRCC's P/E Growth Rating (5) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CGBD (56). This means that MRCC’s stock grew somewhat faster than CGBD’s over the last 12 months.
| CGBD | MRCC | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 56% | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 56% | 2 days ago 57% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 39% | 2 days ago 57% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 45% | 2 days ago 59% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 41% | 2 days ago 49% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 40% | 2 days ago 53% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 21 days ago 55% | 14 days ago 59% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 42% | 6 days ago 53% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 59% | 2 days ago 51% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 47% | 2 days ago 56% |
Advertisement
CGBD and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CGBD has been closely correlated with BCSF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 80% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if CGBD jumps, then BCSF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CGBD | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGBD | 100% | -2.48% | ||
| BCSF - CGBD | 80% Closely correlated | -2.17% | ||
| TSLX - CGBD | 78% Closely correlated | -2.57% | ||
| GSBD - CGBD | 78% Closely correlated | -0.65% | ||
| OBDC - CGBD | 76% Closely correlated | -3.48% | ||
| BBDC - CGBD | 74% Closely correlated | -1.45% | ||
More | ||||
MRCC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MRCC has been loosely correlated with BBDC. These tickers have moved in lockstep 52% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MRCC jumps, then BBDC could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MRCC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRCC | 100% | -0.93% | ||
| BBDC - MRCC | 52% Loosely correlated | -1.45% | ||
| BCSF - MRCC | 51% Loosely correlated | -2.17% | ||
| CGBD - MRCC | 51% Loosely correlated | -2.48% | ||
| CION - MRCC | 51% Loosely correlated | -2.63% | ||
| PFLT - MRCC | 51% Loosely correlated | -0.53% | ||
More | ||||