CIIHY
Price
$38.75
Change
-$0.47 (-1.20%)
Updated
Oct 16 closing price
Capitalization
59.81B
CMSQF
Price
$24.39
Change
-$1.25 (-4.88%)
Updated
Oct 17 closing price
Capitalization
13.93B
Interact to see
Advertisement

CIIHY vs CMSQF

Header iconCIIHY vs CMSQF Comparison
Open Charts CIIHY vs CMSQFBanner chart's image
Citic Securities
Price$38.75
Change-$0.47 (-1.20%)
Volume$366
Capitalization59.81B
Computershare
Price$24.39
Change-$1.25 (-4.88%)
Volume$720
Capitalization13.93B
CIIHY vs CMSQF Comparison Chart in %
CIIHY
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
CIIHY vs. CMSQF commentary
Oct 19, 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 CIIHY is a Hold and CMSQF is a StrongBuy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Oct 19, 2025
Stock price -- (CIIHY: $38.75 vs. CMSQF: $24.39)
Brand notoriety: CIIHY and CMSQF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Banks/Brokers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CIIHY: 59% vs. CMSQF: 55%
Market capitalization -- CIIHY: $59.81B vs. CMSQF: $13.93B
CIIHY [@Investment Banks/Brokers] is valued at $59.81B. CMSQF’s [@Investment Banks/Brokers] market capitalization is $13.93B. 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 $10.72B.

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).

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

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

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.

CIIHY’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CMSQF’s TA Score has 6 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CIIHY’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • CMSQF’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both CIIHY and CMSQF are a good buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

CIIHY (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а +10.52% price change this week, while CMSQF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was +6.46% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was +1.26%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +6.50%, and the average quarterly price growth was +84.90%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Banks/Brokers (+1.26% 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
CIIHY($59.8B) has a higher market cap than CMSQF($13.9B). CMSQF has higher P/E ratio than CIIHY: CMSQF (23.71) vs CIIHY (17.15). CIIHY YTD gains are higher at: 43.791 vs. CMSQF (29.390). CMSQF has less debt than CIIHY: CMSQF (1.92B) vs CIIHY (218B). CIIHY has higher revenues than CMSQF: CIIHY (69.2B) vs CMSQF (3.12B).
CIIHYCMSQFCIIHY / CMSQF
Capitalization59.8B13.9B430%
EBITDAN/A1.07B-
Gain YTD43.79129.390149%
P/E Ratio17.1523.7172%
Revenue69.2B3.12B2,222%
Total CashN/A1.38B-
Total Debt218B1.92B11,348%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CIIHY vs CMSQF: Fundamental Ratings
CIIHY
CMSQF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
3184
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
27
Undervalued
23
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
4212
SMR RATING
1..100
3251
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4049
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
2236
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

CMSQF's Valuation (23) in the null industry is in the same range as CIIHY (27). This means that CMSQF’s stock grew similarly to CIIHY’s over the last 12 months.

CMSQF's Profit vs Risk Rating (12) in the null industry is in the same range as CIIHY (42). This means that CMSQF’s stock grew similarly to CIIHY’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHY's SMR Rating (32) in the null industry is in the same range as CMSQF (51). This means that CIIHY’s stock grew similarly to CMSQF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHY's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as CMSQF (49). This means that CIIHY’s stock grew similarly to CMSQF’s over the last 12 months.

CIIHY's P/E Growth Rating (22) in the null industry is in the same range as CMSQF (36). This means that CIIHY’s stock grew similarly to CMSQF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CIIHYCMSQF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
21%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
45%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
36%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
29%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
49%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
36%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
67%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
31%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
52%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
38%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
52%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
18%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
25%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
30%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
43%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
40%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
22%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CIIHY
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
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
VOX185.150.70
+0.38%
Vanguard Communication Services ETF
UJUN36.700.10
+0.27%
Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra BffrETF™-Jun
EGUS51.540.08
+0.16%
iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Growth ETF
NHYM24.990.01
+0.02%
Nuveen High Yield Municipal Income ETF
VGM10.03-0.06
-0.59%
Invesco Trust Investment Grade Municipals

CIIHY and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CIIHY and FUTU have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CIIHY and FUTU's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CIIHY
1D Price
Change %
CIIHY100%
N/A
FUTU - CIIHY
24%
Poorly correlated
+4.43%
TIGR - CIIHY
22%
Poorly correlated
+2.24%
DMGGF - CIIHY
4%
Poorly correlated
-2.27%
BOMXF - CIIHY
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CMSQF - CIIHY
1%
Poorly correlated
-4.88%
More

CMSQF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CMSQF and CFNCF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CMSQF and CFNCF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CMSQF
1D Price
Change %
CMSQF100%
-4.88%
CFNCF - CMSQF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MCQEF - CMSQF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CURN - CMSQF
15%
Poorly correlated
N/A
DSEEY - CMSQF
6%
Poorly correlated
-1.37%
CIIHY - CMSQF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More