CIIHF
Price
$2.55
Change
-$0.12 (-4.49%)
Updated
Apr 4 closing price
Capitalization
46.09B
GS
Price
$448.94
Change
-$21.20 (-4.51%)
Updated
Apr 7, 10:37 AM (EDT)
Capitalization
134.2B
7 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

CIIHF vs GS

Header iconCIIHF vs GS Comparison
Open Charts CIIHF vs GSBanner chart's image
Citic Securities
Price$2.55
Change-$0.12 (-4.49%)
Volume$2K
Capitalization46.09B
Goldman Sachs Group
Price$448.94
Change-$21.20 (-4.51%)
Volume$5.35K
Capitalization134.2B
CIIHF vs GS Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CIIHF vs. GS commentary
Apr 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 Hold and GS is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Apr 07, 2025
Stock price -- (CIIHF: $2.55 vs. GS: $470.81)
Brand notoriety: CIIHF: Not notable vs. GS: Notable
Both companies represent the Investment Banks/Brokers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CIIHF: 6% vs. GS: 284%
Market capitalization -- CIIHF: $46.09B vs. GS: $134.2B
CIIHF [@Investment Banks/Brokers] is valued at $46.09B. GS’s [@Investment Banks/Brokers] market capitalization is $134.2B. 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 $11.87B.

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

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

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.

GS’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • GS’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.

Price Growth

CIIHF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а -4.40% price change this week, while GS (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was -13.31% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was -5.63%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -9.14%, and the average quarterly price growth was +137.87%.

Reported Earning Dates

GS is expected to report earnings on Apr 14, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Banks/Brokers (-5.63% 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
GS($134B) has a higher market cap than CIIHF($46.1B). GS has higher P/E ratio than CIIHF: GS (18.08) vs CIIHF (8.61). CIIHF YTD gains are higher at: 0.000 vs. GS (-10.278). CIIHF has less debt than GS: CIIHF (201B) vs GS (333B). CIIHF has higher revenues than GS: CIIHF (64.5B) vs GS (46.3B).
CIIHFGSCIIHF / GS
Capitalization46.1B134B34%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD0.000-10.278-
P/E Ratio8.6118.0848%
Revenue64.5B46.3B139%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt201B333B60%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CIIHF vs GS: Fundamental Ratings
CIIHF
GS
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5011
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
26
Undervalued
97
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
568
SMR RATING
1..100
105
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3853
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
1377
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.

CIIHF's Valuation (26) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for GS (97) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry. This means that CIIHF’s stock grew significantly faster than GS’s over the last 12 months.

GS's Profit vs Risk Rating (8) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CIIHF (56) in the null industry. This means that GS’s stock grew somewhat faster than CIIHF’s over the last 12 months.

GS's SMR Rating (5) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry is in the same range as CIIHF (10) in the null industry. This means that GS’s stock grew similarly to CIIHF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHF's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as GS (53) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry. This means that CIIHF’s stock grew similarly to GS’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHF's P/E Growth Rating (13) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GS (77) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry. This means that CIIHF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GS’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GS
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
76%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
70%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
52%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
64%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
58%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
53%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
62%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
57%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 7 days ago
85%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
49%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
GS
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
CRYPTO / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
BTC.X83102.830000617.109400
+0.75%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
SPY536.70-27.82
-4.93%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust
TSLA267.28-15.48
-5.47%
Tesla
GME21.10-1.59
-7.01%
GameStop Corp
AAPL203.19-20.70
-9.25%
Apple

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
-9.21%
HAFG - CIIHF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MCO - CIIHF
23%
Poorly correlated
-6.05%
PIPR - CIIHF
22%
Poorly correlated
-11.17%
MS - CIIHF
21%
Poorly correlated
-9.51%
More

GS and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GS has been closely correlated with SF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 81% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if GS jumps, then SF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GS
1D Price
Change %
GS100%
-9.21%
SF - GS
81%
Closely correlated
-10.87%
EVR - GS
80%
Closely correlated
-15.48%
PIPR - GS
79%
Closely correlated
-11.17%
MC - GS
76%
Closely correlated
-11.96%
JEF - GS
75%
Closely correlated
-13.04%
More