CLILF
Price
$2.09
Change
-$0.01 (-0.48%)
Updated
Jul 17 closing price
Capitalization
13.16B
SHMSF
Price
$0.12
Change
-$0.06 (-33.33%)
Updated
Mar 21 closing price
Capitalization
569.78M
Interact to see
Advertisement

CLILF vs SHMSF

Header iconCLILF vs SHMSF Comparison
Open Charts CLILF vs SHMSFBanner chart's image
Capitaland Investment
Price$2.09
Change-$0.01 (-0.48%)
Volume$35K
Capitalization13.16B
Shimao Services Holdings
Price$0.12
Change-$0.06 (-33.33%)
Volume$142
Capitalization569.78M
CLILF vs SHMSF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CLILF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CLILF vs. SHMSF commentary
Jul 27, 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 CLILF is a Hold and SHMSF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 27, 2025
Stock price -- (CLILF: $2.09 vs. SHMSF: $0.12)
Brand notoriety: CLILF and SHMSF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Real Estate Development industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CLILF: 554% vs. SHMSF: 100%
Market capitalization -- CLILF: $13.16B vs. SHMSF: $569.78M
CLILF [@Real Estate Development] is valued at $13.16B. SHMSF’s [@Real Estate Development] market capitalization is $569.78M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Real Estate Development] industry ranges from $165.37B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Real Estate Development] industry is $5.49B.

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).

CLILF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileSHMSF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • CLILF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • SHMSF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, CLILF is a better buy in the long-term than SHMSF.

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.

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

  • CLILF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 3 bearish.

Price Growth

CLILF (@Real Estate Development) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SHMSF (@Real Estate Development) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Real Estate Development industry was +2.21%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +7.59%, and the average quarterly price growth was +7.20%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Real Estate Development (+2.21% weekly)

Activities range from the renovation and re-lease of existing buildings to the purchase of raw land and the sale of developed land or parcels to others. Demand for land development business is driven by GDP growth, employment rates, interest rates, and access to/cost of capital. For individual companies in this industry, proper cost estimation and successful bidding play critical roles in their profitability. Large companies could potentially have greater access to capital, while smaller companies can specialize in a specific geographic area or market niche. CBRE Group, VICI Properties Inc and Brookfield Property Partners L.P. are some of the large companies in this industry.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CLILF($13.2B) has a higher market cap than SHMSF($570M). CLILF has higher P/E ratio than SHMSF: CLILF (22.52) vs SHMSF (6.02). CLILF YTD gains are higher at: 7.860 vs. SHMSF (-30.923). CLILF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.96B vs. SHMSF (1.36B). SHMSF has higher revenues than CLILF: SHMSF (7.7B) vs CLILF (2.88B).
CLILFSHMSFCLILF / SHMSF
Capitalization13.2B570M2,316%
EBITDA1.96B1.36B144%
Gain YTD7.860-30.923-25%
P/E Ratio22.526.02374%
Revenue2.88B7.7B37%
Total CashN/A5.65B-
Total DebtN/A51.4M-
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CLILFSHMSF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
59%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
56%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
48%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
64%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
44%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
17%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
40%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
13%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
60%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
34%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CLILF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
OSSIX23.090.14
+0.61%
Invesco Main Street Small Cap R6
DHFYX13.740.07
+0.51%
Diamond Hill Large Cap Concentrated Y
RETSX91.160.34
+0.37%
Russell Inv Tax-Managed US Large Cap S
BGFRX13.580.03
+0.22%
William Blair Growth R6
USAGX29.930.05
+0.17%
Victory Precious Metals and Minerals

CLILF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CLILF and ACNDF have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CLILF and ACNDF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CLILF
1D Price
Change %
CLILF100%
N/A
ACNDF - CLILF
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SWPFF - CLILF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FPH - CLILF
21%
Poorly correlated
-14.93%
AWCA - CLILF
11%
Poorly correlated
N/A
OMH - CLILF
6%
Poorly correlated
-4.76%
More

SHMSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SHMSF and VGPBF have been poorly correlated (+16% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SHMSF and VGPBF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SHMSF
1D Price
Change %
SHMSF100%
N/A
VGPBF - SHMSF
16%
Poorly correlated
-3.32%
AWCA - SHMSF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CLILF - SHMSF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LRE - SHMSF
3%
Poorly correlated
-6.12%
OZ - SHMSF
1%
Poorly correlated
+1.15%
More