CIIHF
Price
$3.65
Change
-$0.44 (-10.76%)
Updated
Sep 3 closing price
Capitalization
60.4B
CMSQF
Price
$26.00
Change
+$1.19 (+4.80%)
Updated
Jul 9 closing price
Capitalization
14.13B
Interact to see
Advertisement

CIIHF vs CMSQF

Header iconCIIHF vs CMSQF Comparison
Open Charts CIIHF vs CMSQFBanner chart's image
Citic Securities
Price$3.65
Change-$0.44 (-10.76%)
Volume$250
Capitalization60.4B
Computershare
Price$26.00
Change+$1.19 (+4.80%)
Volume$589
Capitalization14.13B
CIIHF vs CMSQF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CIIHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
CMSQF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CIIHF vs. CMSQF commentary
Sep 08, 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 CIIHF is a Hold and CMSQF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 08, 2025
Stock price -- (CIIHF: $3.65 vs. CMSQF: $26.00)
Brand notoriety: CIIHF and CMSQF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Banks/Brokers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CIIHF: 30% vs. CMSQF: 108%
Market capitalization -- CIIHF: $60.4B vs. CMSQF: $14.13B
CIIHF [@Investment Banks/Brokers] is valued at $60.4B. CMSQF’s [@Investment Banks/Brokers] market capitalization is $14.13B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Banks/Brokers] industry ranges from $928.5B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Banks/Brokers] industry is $10.09B.

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).

CIIHF’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileCMSQF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • CIIHF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
  • CMSQF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, both CIIHF and CMSQF are a good buy in the long-term.

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.

CIIHF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CMSQF’s TA Score has 1 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CIIHF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • CMSQF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 0 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CMSQF is a better buy in the short-term than CIIHF.

Price Growth

CIIHF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а -10.76% price change this week, while CMSQF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was +0.73%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.48%, and the average quarterly price growth was +41.22%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Banks/Brokers (+0.73% weekly)

These banks specialize in underwriting (helping companies with debt financing or equity issuances), IPOs, facilitating mergers and other corporate reorganizations and acting as a broker or financial advisor for institutions. They might also trade securities on their own accounts. Investment banks potentially thrive on expanding its network of clients, since that could help them increase profits. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and CME Group Inc are some of the largest investment banking companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CIIHF($60.4B) has a higher market cap than CMSQF($14.1B). CMSQF has higher P/E ratio than CIIHF: CMSQF (25.28) vs CIIHF (16.19). CMSQF (37.931) and CIIHF (36.843) have similar YTD gains . CMSQF has less debt than CIIHF: CMSQF (1.74B) vs CIIHF (211B). CIIHF has higher revenues than CMSQF: CIIHF (67.7B) vs CMSQF (3.01B).
CIIHFCMSQFCIIHF / CMSQF
Capitalization60.4B14.1B428%
EBITDAN/A1.04B-
Gain YTD36.84337.93197%
P/E Ratio16.1925.2864%
Revenue67.7B3.01B2,251%
Total CashN/A1.24B-
Total Debt211B1.74B12,119%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CIIHF vs CMSQF: Fundamental Ratings
CIIHF
CMSQF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
26
Undervalued
24
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
356
SMR RATING
1..100
1649
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3750
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
937
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a50

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.

CMSQF's Valuation (24) in the null industry is in the same range as CIIHF (26). This means that CMSQF’s stock grew similarly to CIIHF’s over the last 12 months.

CMSQF's Profit vs Risk Rating (6) in the null industry is in the same range as CIIHF (35). This means that CMSQF’s stock grew similarly to CIIHF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHF's SMR Rating (16) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CMSQF (49). This means that CIIHF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CMSQF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHF's Price Growth Rating (37) in the null industry is in the same range as CMSQF (50). This means that CIIHF’s stock grew similarly to CMSQF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHF's P/E Growth Rating (9) in the null industry is in the same range as CMSQF (37). This means that CIIHF’s stock grew similarly to CMSQF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CIIHFCMSQF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
55%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
33%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
42%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
38%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
56%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
40%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
27%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
45%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
56%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
25%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CIIHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
CMSQF
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 %
TSAT23.101.36
+6.26%
Telesat Corp
KARO52.980.60
+1.15%
Karooooo Ltd
OACCU10.56N/A
N/A
Oaktree Acquisition Corp III Life Sciences
CLST13.10-0.05
-0.38%
Catalyst Bancorp
CFR128.14-2.07
-1.59%
Cullen/Frost Bankers

CIIHF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CIIHF and GS have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CIIHF and GS's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CIIHF
1D Price
Change %
CIIHF100%
N/A
GS - CIIHF
25%
Poorly correlated
-1.43%
HAFG - CIIHF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MCO - CIIHF
23%
Poorly correlated
-0.15%
PIPR - CIIHF
22%
Poorly correlated
-1.24%
MS - CIIHF
21%
Poorly correlated
-1.62%
More

CMSQF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CMSQF and CURN have been poorly correlated (+11% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CMSQF and CURN's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CMSQF
1D Price
Change %
CMSQF100%
N/A
CURN - CMSQF
11%
Poorly correlated
+0.72%
CIIHY - CMSQF
2%
Poorly correlated
-4.77%
CMSQY - CMSQF
2%
Poorly correlated
-0.29%
DBOEF - CMSQF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CIIHF - CMSQF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More