CIADF
Price
$2.50
Change
+$1.02 (+68.92%)
Updated
Apr 2 closing price
Capitalization
14.88B
LYSFY
Price
$8.55
Change
+$0.05 (+0.59%)
Updated
Jun 4 closing price
Capitalization
2.49B
Interact to see
Advertisement

CIADF vs LYSFY

Header iconCIADF vs LYSFY Comparison
Open Charts CIADF vs LYSFYBanner chart's image
China Mengniu Dairy
Price$2.50
Change+$1.02 (+68.92%)
Volume$100
Capitalization14.88B
Leroy Seafood Group ASA
Price$8.55
Change+$0.05 (+0.59%)
Volume$1K
Capitalization2.49B
CIADF vs LYSFY Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
LYSFY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CIADF vs. LYSFY commentary
Jun 28, 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 CIADF is a Hold and LYSFY is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jun 28, 2025
Stock price -- (CIADF: $2.50 vs. LYSFY: $8.55)
Brand notoriety: CIADF and LYSFY are both not notable
Both companies represent the Food: Specialty/Candy industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CIADF: 100% vs. LYSFY: 108%
Market capitalization -- CIADF: $14.88B vs. LYSFY: $2.49B
CIADF [@Food: Specialty/Candy] is valued at $14.88B. LYSFY’s [@Food: Specialty/Candy] market capitalization is $2.49B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Food: Specialty/Candy] industry ranges from $327.81B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Food: Specialty/Candy] industry is $9.42B.

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).

CIADF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileLYSFY’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

LYSFY’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • LYSFY’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 2 bearish.

Price Growth

CIADF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while LYSFY (@Food: Specialty/Candy) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food: Specialty/Candy industry was -0.38%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.26%, and the average quarterly price growth was +0.17%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Food: Specialty/Candy (-0.38% weekly)

A specialty/candy manufacturer specializes in one or more of the following: chocolate, candies, pasta, condiments, seasonings, among other items. Hershey Company, McCormick & Company and J.M. Smucker Company are some of the major firms in this segment. Demand for this industry’s products comes from both institutions/restaurants as well as households.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CIADF($14.9B) has a higher market cap than LYSFY($2.49B). CIADF has higher P/E ratio than LYSFY: CIADF (21.83) vs LYSFY (8.02). CIADF YTD gains are higher at: 68.919 vs. LYSFY (3.508). CIADF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 9.01B vs. LYSFY (6.12B). CIADF has more cash in the bank: 15.9B vs. LYSFY (3.59B). LYSFY has less debt than CIADF: LYSFY (9.44B) vs CIADF (27B). CIADF has higher revenues than LYSFY: CIADF (88.1B) vs LYSFY (28.1B).
CIADFLYSFYCIADF / LYSFY
Capitalization14.9B2.49B599%
EBITDA9.01B6.12B147%
Gain YTD68.9193.5081,965%
P/E Ratio21.838.02272%
Revenue88.1B28.1B314%
Total Cash15.9B3.59B444%
Total Debt27B9.44B286%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CIADF vs LYSFY: Fundamental Ratings
CIADF
LYSFY
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
3547
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
57
Fair valued
10
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10083
SMR RATING
1..100
5570
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3747
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
166
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.

LYSFY's Valuation (10) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CIADF (57). This means that LYSFY’s stock grew somewhat faster than CIADF’s over the last 12 months.

LYSFY's Profit vs Risk Rating (83) in the null industry is in the same range as CIADF (100). This means that LYSFY’s stock grew similarly to CIADF’s over the last 12 months.

CIADF's SMR Rating (55) in the null industry is in the same range as LYSFY (70). This means that CIADF’s stock grew similarly to LYSFY’s over the last 12 months.

CIADF's Price Growth Rating (37) in the null industry is in the same range as LYSFY (47). This means that CIADF’s stock grew similarly to LYSFY’s over the last 12 months.

CIADF's P/E Growth Rating (1) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LYSFY (66). This means that CIADF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LYSFY’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CIADFLYSFY
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
42%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
30%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
45%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
17%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
25%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
20%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
22%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
38%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
LYSFY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SWIN3.200.14
+4.58%
Solowin Holdings Ordinary Share
CVGW26.890.33
+1.24%
Calavo Growers
LTM40.090.06
+0.15%
LATAM Airlines Group S.A.
TRN26.98-0.18
-0.66%
Trinity Industries
UCAR3.86-0.20
-4.90%
U Power Limited

CIADF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CIADF has been loosely correlated with PIFFY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 37% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CIADF jumps, then PIFFY could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CIADF
1D Price
Change %
CIADF100%
N/A
PIFFY - CIADF
37%
Loosely correlated
N/A
BOF - CIADF
32%
Poorly correlated
+3.98%
AMNC - CIADF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LYSFY - CIADF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PSYCF - CIADF
24%
Poorly correlated
-17.36%
More

LYSFY and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that LYSFY and CIADF have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LYSFY and CIADF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LYSFY
1D Price
Change %
LYSFY100%
N/A
CIADF - LYSFY
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
ACOPY - LYSFY
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MEJHY - LYSFY
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NFPDF - LYSFY
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NCRA - LYSFY
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More