Advertisement
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 0 green FA rating(s).
- CIADF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- SHVTF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
CIADF (@Food: Major Diversified) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SHVTF (@Food: Major Diversified) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food: Major Diversified industry was -0.20%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.91%, and the average quarterly price growth was +1093.46%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Food: Major Diversified (-0.20% weekly)Companies in this industry usually make a diverse range of agricultural and/or processed food. Some prominent names in this segment are Mondelez International, which makes chocolates, biscuits, cookies etc. The Kraft Heinz Company specializes in ketchups, sauces, fruit drink pouches and many more. General Mills, Inc. sells flour and cereal. Kellogg is famous for its snacks and breakfast cereal. And so on down the line. As more and more consumers are looking for healthier options in food in recent years, several legacy food companies have responded by revamping brands to include organic and no-added-sugar versions, and/or acquiring healthy food firms, and even streamlining operations.
| CIADF | SHVTF | CIADF / SHVTF | |
| Capitalization | 8.13B | 339M | 2,398% |
| EBITDA | N/A | 57.6M | - |
| Gain YTD | 68.919 | 36.735 | 188% |
| P/E Ratio | 664.16 | 22.51 | 2,950% |
| Revenue | N/A | 374M | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | 2.87M | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 401M | - |
CIADF | SHVTF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 56 Fair valued | 57 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 56 | 83 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 42 | 47 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 1 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
CIADF's Valuation (56) in the null industry is in the same range as SHVTF (57). This means that CIADF’s stock grew similarly to 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 (56) in the null industry is in the same range as SHVTF (83). This means that CIADF’s stock grew similarly to SHVTF’s over the last 12 months.
CIADF's Price Growth Rating (42) in the null industry is in the same range as SHVTF (47). This means that CIADF’s stock grew similarly to SHVTF’s over the last 12 months.
CIADF's P/E Growth Rating (1) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for SHVTF (100). This means that CIADF’s stock grew significantly faster than SHVTF’s over the last 12 months.
| CIADF | SHVTF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 16% | 4 days ago 23% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 20% | 4 days ago 24% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| XPH | 43.17 | 0.63 | +1.48% |
| SPDR® S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF | |||
| BUI | 26.90 | 0.27 | +1.01% |
| BlackRock Utilities Infrastructure & Power Opportunities Trust | |||
| BKLN | 20.95 | -0.01 | -0.05% |
| Invesco Senior Loan ETF | |||
| TFJL | 19.87 | -0.13 | -0.65% |
| Innovator 20 Year Treasury Bond 5 Floor ETF | |||
| SAPH | 53.32 | -0.56 | -1.04% |
| SAP SE ADRHEDGED SAPH | |||
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 | -1.79% | ||
| AMNC - CIADF | 31% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LYSFY - CIADF | 29% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PSYCF - CIADF | 24% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
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 | +0.77% | ||
| SAPIF - SHVTF | 1% Poorly correlated | +9.30% | ||
More | ||||