CGIUF
Price
$1.82
Change
+$0.09 (+5.17%)
Updated
Jul 11 closing price
Capitalization
1.99B
LNSPF
Price
$2.63
Change
+$0.02 (+0.77%)
Updated
Jul 22 closing price
Capitalization
2.34B
Interact to see
Advertisement

CGIUF vs LNSPF

Header iconCGIUF vs LNSPF Comparison
Open Charts CGIUF vs LNSPFBanner chart's image
ESR REIT
Price$1.82
Change+$0.09 (+5.17%)
Volume$1.91K
Capitalization1.99B
London & Stamford Property
Price$2.63
Change+$0.02 (+0.77%)
Volume$6.02K
Capitalization2.34B
CGIUF vs LNSPF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CGIUF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
LNSPF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CGIUF vs. LNSPF commentary
Jul 27, 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 CGIUF is a Hold and LNSPF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 27, 2025
Stock price -- (CGIUF: $1.83 vs. LNSPF: $2.63)
Brand notoriety: CGIUF and LNSPF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Real Estate Investment Trusts industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CGIUF: 32% vs. LNSPF: 278%
Market capitalization -- CGIUF: $1.99B vs. LNSPF: $2.34B
CGIUF [@Real Estate Investment Trusts] is valued at $1.99B. LNSPF’s [@Real Estate Investment Trusts] market capitalization is $2.34B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Real Estate Investment Trusts] industry ranges from $243.79B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Real Estate Investment Trusts] industry is $5.44B.

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).

CGIUF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileLNSPF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • CGIUF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • LNSPF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, CGIUF is a better buy in the long-term than LNSPF.

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.

CGIUF’s TA Score shows that 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish while LNSPF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CGIUF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 2 bearish.
  • LNSPF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, LNSPF is a better buy in the short-term than CGIUF.

Price Growth

CGIUF (@Real Estate Investment Trusts) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while LNSPF (@Real Estate Investment Trusts) price change was +0.77% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Real Estate Investment Trusts industry was +0.93%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.25%, and the average quarterly price growth was +1.71%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Real Estate Investment Trusts (+0.93% weekly)

A real estate investment trust (REIT) is a company any that owns, and in most cases, operates, income-producing real estate – ranging from office and apartment buildings to warehouses, hospitals, shopping centers, hotels and timberlands. Some REITs are involved in financing real estate. Equity REITs invest in and own properties, while mortgage REITs own and invest in property mortgages. REITs are required by law to pay out at least 90% of their annual taxable income (excluding capital gains) to shareholders in the form of dividends. Some REITs could be more cyclical than others; for example, when an economy is undergoing a recession, hotel REITs could be more vulnerable, compared to say healthcare REIT given that healthcare needs are less likely to depend on economic cycles. American Tower Corporation, Prologis, Inc. and Crown Castle International Corp are some of the biggest REIT companies in the U.S.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
LNSPF($2.34B) has a higher market cap than CGIUF($1.99B). CGIUF has higher P/E ratio than LNSPF: CGIUF (17.57) vs LNSPF (7.23). LNSPF YTD gains are higher at: 16.630 vs. CGIUF (-4.400). CGIUF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 158M vs. LNSPF (-477.5M). CGIUF has more cash in the bank: 49.6M vs. LNSPF (23.9M). LNSPF has less debt than CGIUF: LNSPF (1.02B) vs CGIUF (2.46B). CGIUF has higher revenues than LNSPF: CGIUF (392M) vs LNSPF (147M).
CGIUFLNSPFCGIUF / LNSPF
Capitalization1.99B2.34B85%
EBITDA158M-477.5M-33%
Gain YTD-4.40016.630-26%
P/E Ratio17.577.23243%
Revenue392M147M267%
Total Cash49.6M23.9M208%
Total Debt2.46B1.02B242%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CGIUF vs LNSPF: Fundamental Ratings
CGIUF
LNSPF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
40
Fair valued
76
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10095
SMR RATING
1..100
9593
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5054
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
10091
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.

CGIUF's Valuation (40) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LNSPF (76). This means that CGIUF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LNSPF’s over the last 12 months.

LNSPF's Profit vs Risk Rating (95) in the null industry is in the same range as CGIUF (100). This means that LNSPF’s stock grew similarly to CGIUF’s over the last 12 months.

LNSPF's SMR Rating (93) in the null industry is in the same range as CGIUF (95). This means that LNSPF’s stock grew similarly to CGIUF’s over the last 12 months.

CGIUF's Price Growth Rating (50) in the null industry is in the same range as LNSPF (54). This means that CGIUF’s stock grew similarly to LNSPF’s over the last 12 months.

LNSPF's P/E Growth Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as CGIUF (100). This means that LNSPF’s stock grew similarly to CGIUF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CGIUFLNSPF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
45%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
33%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
43%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
43%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
20%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
46%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
23%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
43%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
21%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
32%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
67%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
22%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
37%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CGIUF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
LNSPF
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 %
WSCOX13.820.07
+0.51%
Allspring Disciplined Small Cap Inst
IBCGX20.110.10
+0.50%
VY® Baron Growth S2
JCPRX23.340.08
+0.34%
JPMorgan US Large Cap Core Plus R5
VWIAX62.700.15
+0.24%
Vanguard Wellesley® Income Admiral™
MTOIX22.100.04
+0.18%
NYLI Income Builder Class I

CGIUF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CGIUF has been loosely correlated with SILA. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CGIUF jumps, then SILA could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CGIUF
1D Price
Change %
CGIUF100%
N/A
SILA - CGIUF
35%
Loosely correlated
-1.02%
MAPIF - CGIUF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
AOTUF - CGIUF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LNSPF - CGIUF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CHTH - CGIUF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

LNSPF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, LNSPF has been loosely correlated with MAPIF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if LNSPF jumps, then MAPIF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LNSPF
1D Price
Change %
LNSPF100%
N/A
MAPIF - LNSPF
36%
Loosely correlated
N/A
CHTH - LNSPF
32%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BTLCY - LNSPF
26%
Poorly correlated
-1.01%
UTGPF - LNSPF
26%
Poorly correlated
-0.93%
CGIUF - LNSPF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More