Advertisement
CICOF vs DLPTF
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 CICOF is a Hold and DLPTF 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).
CICOF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileDLPTF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- CICOF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- DLPTF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
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.
CICOF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while DLPTF’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).
- CICOF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 3 bearish.
- DLPTF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 0 bearish.
Price Growth
CICOF (@Marine Shipping) experienced а +2.41% price change this week, while DLPTF (@Marine Shipping) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Marine Shipping industry was +3.18%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.40%, and the average quarterly price growth was +2.93%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Marine Shipping (+3.18% weekly)The marine shipping industry provides passenger transportation or cargo shipping services via waterways. This industry includes freight towage, ferry services and warehousing on deep-sea and inland waterways. The aviation sector may have reduced the popularity of sea travel for several passengers, but it is still in demand for short trips and pleasure cruises. Teekay Offshore Partners L.P. Cum Red Perp Pfd., Kirby Corporation and Seaspan Corporation are some of the well-known names in the business.
| CICOF | DLPTF | CICOF / DLPTF | |
| Capitalization | 32.3B | 4.46B | 724% |
| EBITDA | N/A | 1.68B | - |
| Gain YTD | 3.659 | -1.163 | -315% |
| P/E Ratio | 3.96 | 15.24 | 26% |
| Revenue | N/A | 10.7B | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | 5.88B | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 12.7B | - |
CICOF | DLPTF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 4 Undervalued | 26 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 36 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 20 | 87 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 58 | 58 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 97 | 14 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 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.
CICOF's Valuation (4) in the null industry is in the same range as DLPTF (26). This means that CICOF’s stock grew similarly to DLPTF’s over the last 12 months.
CICOF's Profit vs Risk Rating (36) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for DLPTF (100). This means that CICOF’s stock grew somewhat faster than DLPTF’s over the last 12 months.
CICOF's SMR Rating (20) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for DLPTF (87). This means that CICOF’s stock grew significantly faster than DLPTF’s over the last 12 months.
CICOF's Price Growth Rating (58) in the null industry is in the same range as DLPTF (58). This means that CICOF’s stock grew similarly to DLPTF’s over the last 12 months.
DLPTF's P/E Growth Rating (14) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CICOF (97). This means that DLPTF’s stock grew significantly faster than CICOF’s over the last 12 months.
| CICOF | DLPTF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 75% | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 69% | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 62% | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 79% | 5 days ago 29% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 66% | 5 days ago 30% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 84% | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 60% | N/A |
Advertisement
CICOF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CICOF and AMKAF have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CICOF and AMKAF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CICOF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CICOF | 100% | N/A | ||
| AMKAF - CICOF | 22% Poorly correlated | -0.17% | ||
| MPZZF - CICOF | 20% Poorly correlated | +3.23% | ||
| AMKBY - CICOF | 12% Poorly correlated | -1.79% | ||
| BWLP - CICOF | 11% Poorly correlated | +1.05% | ||
| CICOY - CICOF | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
DLPTF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that DLPTF and CICOY have been poorly correlated (+4% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that DLPTF and CICOY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To DLPTF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DLPTF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CICOY - DLPTF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CICOF - DLPTF | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HLAGF - DLPTF | 2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| KAIKY - DLPTF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HHULF - DLPTF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||