CHGCY vs CMOPF
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 CHGCY is a Hold and CMOPF 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).
CHGCY’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileCMOPF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CHGCY’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- CMOPF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CHGCY (@Pharmaceuticals: Major) experienced а -1.25% price change this week, while CMOPF (@Pharmaceuticals: Major) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pharmaceuticals: Major industry was -4.26%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -5.33%, and the average quarterly price growth was +2.99%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pharmaceuticals: Major (-4.26% weekly)The Major Pharmaceuticals industry includes companies that are involved in various processes of creating drugs to treat/prevent diseases. These companies engage in research, testing and manufacturing, as well as the distribution of pharmaceuticals into markets. Johnson & Johnson, Merck & Co., Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Novartis are among the largest companies in this category.
| CHGCY | CMOPF | CHGCY / CMOPF | |
| Capitalization | 49.4B | 828M | 5,966% |
| EBITDA | 458B | 42.1M | 1,087,886% |
| Gain YTD | 21.432 | 80.437 | 27% |
| P/E Ratio | 21.46 | 68.49 | 31% |
| Revenue | 1.24T | 104M | 1,196,154% |
| Total Cash | 665B | 222M | 299,550% |
| Total Debt | 215M | 176M | 122% |
CHGCY | CMOPF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 52 | 48 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 84 Overvalued | 22 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 45 | 79 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 41 | 88 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 45 | 40 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 55 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 35 | n/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.
CMOPF's Valuation (22) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CHGCY (84). This means that CMOPF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CHGCY’s over the last 12 months.
CHGCY's Profit vs Risk Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CMOPF (79). This means that CHGCY’s stock grew somewhat faster than CMOPF’s over the last 12 months.
CHGCY's SMR Rating (41) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CMOPF (88). This means that CHGCY’s stock grew somewhat faster than CMOPF’s over the last 12 months.
CMOPF's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as CHGCY (45). This means that CMOPF’s stock grew similarly to CHGCY’s over the last 12 months.
CHGCY's P/E Growth Rating (55) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CMOPF (100). This means that CHGCY’s stock grew somewhat faster than CMOPF’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
CHGCY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CHGCY and CHGCF have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CHGCY and CHGCF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CHGCY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHGCY | 100% | -0.56% | ||
| CHGCF - CHGCY | 32% Poorly correlated | +1.99% | ||
| OTSKY - CHGCY | 30% Poorly correlated | +0.99% | ||
| OPHLY - CHGCY | 22% Poorly correlated | -1.54% | ||
| DSNKY - CHGCY | 22% Poorly correlated | -1.82% | ||
| RHHBY - CHGCY | 20% Poorly correlated | -2.38% | ||
More | ||||
CMOPF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CMOPF and CHGCF have been poorly correlated (+10% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CMOPF and CHGCF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CMOPF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMOPF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CHGCF - CMOPF | 10% Poorly correlated | +1.99% | ||
| CHGCY - CMOPF | 5% Poorly correlated | -0.56% | ||
| BAYZF - CMOPF | 2% Poorly correlated | +0.14% | ||
| GIFLF - CMOPF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CHJTF - CMOPF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||