CLCMF vs CVHSY
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 CLCMF is a Hold and CVHSY 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).
CLCMF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileCVHSY’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CLCMF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- CVHSY’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CLCMF (@Wireless Telecommunications) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while CVHSY (@Wireless Telecommunications) price change was +13.23% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Wireless Telecommunications industry was +9.50%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.41%, and the average quarterly price growth was +63.28%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Wireless Telecommunications (+9.50% weekly)Wireless Telecom includes companies that sell wireless antenna or satellite-based communication services. This is the fastest-growing area in communications, as more and more communication and computing happen on mobile devices and cloud-based platforms. Wireless telecom is a key industry for global connectivity, and has even further room for growth in emerging markets and in rural parts of developed nations. People’s growing need for speed in data connectivity, higher resolution, and smoother video streaming and multimedia applications should drive growth and competition within this segment. T-Mobile US, Inc., Vodafone Group, and Sprint Corporation are some major providers of wireless telecom.
| CLCMF | CVHSY | CLCMF / CVHSY | |
| Capitalization | 2.19B | 1.13B | 194% |
| EBITDA | 2.63B | 53.7B | 5% |
| Gain YTD | 20.968 | 55.488 | 38% |
| P/E Ratio | 35.12 | 3.88 | 905% |
| Revenue | 28.5B | 704B | 4% |
| Total Cash | 1.55B | 93.7B | 2% |
| Total Debt | 11B | 606B | 2% |
CLCMF | CVHSY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 42 | 89 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 91 Overvalued | 64 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 98 | 27 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 93 | 96 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 41 | 38 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 99 | 78 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 30 | 85 |
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.
CVHSY's Valuation (64) in the null industry is in the same range as CLCMF (91). This means that CVHSY’s stock grew similarly to CLCMF’s over the last 12 months.
CVHSY's Profit vs Risk Rating (27) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CLCMF (98). This means that CVHSY’s stock grew significantly faster than CLCMF’s over the last 12 months.
CLCMF's SMR Rating (93) in the null industry is in the same range as CVHSY (96). This means that CLCMF’s stock grew similarly to CVHSY’s over the last 12 months.
CVHSY's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as CLCMF (41). This means that CVHSY’s stock grew similarly to CLCMF’s over the last 12 months.
CVHSY's P/E Growth Rating (78) in the null industry is in the same range as CLCMF (99). This means that CVHSY’s stock grew similarly to CLCMF’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
CLCMF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CLCMF and TIAOF have been poorly correlated (+27% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CLCMF and TIAOF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CLCMF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLCMF | 100% | N/A | ||
| TIAOF - CLCMF | 27% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HTWSF - CLCMF | 26% Poorly correlated | -0.74% | ||
| BZQIF - CLCMF | 10% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CHRYY - CLCMF | 6% Poorly correlated | -5.53% | ||
| CVHSY - CLCMF | 1% Poorly correlated | +6.36% | ||
More | ||||
CVHSY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CVHSY and HKTTY have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CVHSY and HKTTY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CVHSY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVHSY | 100% | +6.36% | ||
| HKTTY - CVHSY | 23% Poorly correlated | -1.46% | ||
| IIJIF - CVHSY | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BZQIY - CVHSY | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CHWRF - CVHSY | 5% Poorly correlated | -0.08% | ||
| FRTN - CVHSY | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||