CIIHF
Price
$3.03
Change
+$0.48 (+18.82%)
Updated
Jun 25 closing price
Capitalization
46.09B
DBOEF
Price
$318.04
Change
+$7.60 (+2.45%)
Updated
Jul 3 closing price
Capitalization
35.3B
Interact to see
Advertisement

CIIHF vs DBOEF

Header iconCIIHF vs DBOEF Comparison
Open Charts CIIHF vs DBOEFBanner chart's image
Citic Securities
Price$3.03
Change+$0.48 (+18.82%)
Volume$1K
Capitalization46.09B
Deutsche Boerse AG
Price$318.04
Change+$7.60 (+2.45%)
Volume$30
Capitalization35.3B
CIIHF vs DBOEF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CIIHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
DBOEF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CIIHF vs. DBOEF commentary
Jul 07, 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 Buy and DBOEF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 07, 2025
Stock price -- (CIIHF: $3.03 vs. DBOEF: $318.04)
Brand notoriety: CIIHF and DBOEF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Banks/Brokers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CIIHF: 54% vs. DBOEF: 1%
Market capitalization -- CIIHF: $46.09B vs. DBOEF: $35.3B
CIIHF [@Investment Banks/Brokers] is valued at $46.09B. DBOEF’s [@Investment Banks/Brokers] market capitalization is $35.3B. 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 $12.11B.

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 whileDBOEF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • CIIHF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
  • DBOEF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, CIIHF is a better buy in the long-term than DBOEF.

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 DBOEF’s TA Score has 1 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CIIHF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 2 bearish.
  • DBOEF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CIIHF is a better buy in the short-term than DBOEF.

Price Growth

CIIHF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while DBOEF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was -1.86% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was +24.10%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +14.99%, and the average quarterly price growth was +112.48%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Banks/Brokers (+24.10% 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($46.1B) has a higher market cap than DBOEF($35.3B). DBOEF has higher P/E ratio than CIIHF: DBOEF (18.94) vs CIIHF (8.61). DBOEF YTD gains are higher at: 34.609 vs. CIIHF (13.598). DBOEF has less debt than CIIHF: DBOEF (6.32B) vs CIIHF (201B). CIIHF has higher revenues than DBOEF: CIIHF (64.5B) vs DBOEF (5.68B).
CIIHFDBOEFCIIHF / DBOEF
Capitalization46.1B35.3B131%
EBITDAN/A2.78B-
Gain YTD13.59834.60939%
P/E Ratio8.6118.9445%
Revenue64.5B5.68B1,137%
Total CashN/A209B-
Total Debt201B6.32B3,178%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CIIHF vs DBOEF: Fundamental Ratings
CIIHF
DBOEF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
21
Undervalued
94
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
458
SMR RATING
1..100
1248
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4144
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
1130
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50n/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.

CIIHF's Valuation (21) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for DBOEF (94). This means that CIIHF’s stock grew significantly faster than DBOEF’s over the last 12 months.

DBOEF's Profit vs Risk Rating (8) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CIIHF (45). This means that DBOEF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CIIHF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHF's SMR Rating (12) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for DBOEF (48). This means that CIIHF’s stock grew somewhat faster than DBOEF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHF's Price Growth Rating (41) in the null industry is in the same range as DBOEF (44). This means that CIIHF’s stock grew similarly to DBOEF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHF's P/E Growth Rating (11) in the null industry is in the same range as DBOEF (30). This means that CIIHF’s stock grew similarly to DBOEF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CIIHFDBOEF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
55%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
57%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
58%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
56%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
54%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
26%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
59%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
24%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
60%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
60%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CIIHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
DBOEF
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 %
NCNO28.700.73
+2.61%
nCino
PX10.750.07
+0.66%
P10
AEP103.860.60
+0.58%
American Electric Power Company
MLEC6.050.04
+0.58%
Moolec Science SA
SLI2.21-0.02
-0.90%
Standard Lithium Ltd

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
+1.09%
HAFG - CIIHF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MCO - CIIHF
23%
Poorly correlated
+1.60%
PIPR - CIIHF
22%
Poorly correlated
+0.16%
MS - CIIHF
21%
Poorly correlated
+0.90%
More

DBOEF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, DBOEF has been loosely correlated with DBOEY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 54% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if DBOEF jumps, then DBOEY could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To DBOEF
1D Price
Change %
DBOEF100%
+2.45%
DBOEY - DBOEF
54%
Loosely correlated
+0.48%
LDNXF - DBOEF
20%
Poorly correlated
-0.20%
CMSQY - DBOEF
5%
Poorly correlated
-0.82%
CLPE - DBOEF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CIIHF - DBOEF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More