CIADF vs SHVTF
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 SHVTF 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).
CIADF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSHVTF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CIADF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- SHVTF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CIADF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SHVTF (@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 -0.62%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.29%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.13%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Food: Specialty/Candy (-0.62% 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.
| CIADF | SHVTF | CIADF / SHVTF | |
| Capitalization | 14.9B | 340M | 4,382% |
| EBITDA | 9.01B | -128.24M | -7,024% |
| Gain YTD | -42.673 | 28.230 | -151% |
| P/E Ratio | 21.83 | 78.13 | 28% |
| Revenue | 88.1B | 191M | 46,126% |
| Total Cash | 15.9B | 1.14M | 1,400,881% |
| Total Debt | 27B | 378M | 7,143% |
CIADF | SHVTF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 39 | 46 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 15 Undervalued | 58 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 58 | 95 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 80 | 52 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 89 | 5 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
CIADF's Valuation (15) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SHVTF (58). This means that CIADF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SHVTF’s over the last 12 months.
CIADF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as SHVTF (100). This means that CIADF’s stock grew similarly to SHVTF’s over the last 12 months.
CIADF's SMR Rating (58) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SHVTF (95). This means that CIADF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SHVTF’s over the last 12 months.
SHVTF's Price Growth Rating (52) in the null industry is in the same range as CIADF (80). This means that SHVTF’s stock grew similarly to CIADF’s over the last 12 months.
SHVTF's P/E Growth Rating (5) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CIADF (89). This means that SHVTF’s stock grew significantly faster than CIADF’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 (%) |
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.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CIADF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIADF | 100% | N/A | ||
| PIFFY - CIADF | 37% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| BOF - CIADF | 32% Poorly correlated | -2.00% | ||
| AMNC - CIADF | 31% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LYSFY - CIADF | 29% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PSYCF - CIADF | 24% Poorly correlated | -7.29% | ||
More | ||||
SHVTF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that SHVTF and VTSYF have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SHVTF and VTSYF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To SHVTF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SHVTF | 100% | N/A | ||
| VTSYF - SHVTF | 29% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CIADF - SHVTF | 23% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SWSSF - SHVTF | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| RSGUF - SHVTF | 2% Poorly correlated | -0.12% | ||
| SAPIF - SHVTF | 1% Poorly correlated | +0.05% | ||
More | ||||