CMSQY vs PIPR
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 CMSQY is a Buy and PIPR 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).
CMSQY’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whilePIPR’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CMSQY’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
- PIPR’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
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.
CMSQY’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while PIPR’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- CMSQY’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
- PIPR’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
CMSQY (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а -15.77% price change this week, while PIPR (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was -12.32% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was -5.43%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -8.98%, and the average quarterly price growth was +138.02%.
Reported Earning Dates
PIPR is expected to report earnings on Apr 25, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Investment Banks/Brokers (-5.43% 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.
| CMSQY | PIPR | CMSQY / PIPR | |
| Capitalization | 10.1B | 2.98B | 339% |
| EBITDA | 825M | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 15.431 | -22.306 | -69% |
| P/E Ratio | 32.15 | 39.76 | 81% |
| Revenue | 2.9B | 1.3B | 223% |
| Total Cash | 1.08B | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 2.77B | 164M | 1,689% |
CMSQY | PIPR | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 75 | 16 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 29 Undervalued | 36 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 4 | 15 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 64 | 43 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 39 | 61 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 32 | 87 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 50 |
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.
CMSQY's Valuation (29) in the null industry is in the same range as PIPR (36). This means that CMSQY’s stock grew similarly to PIPR’s over the last 12 months.
CMSQY's Profit vs Risk Rating (4) in the null industry is in the same range as PIPR (15). This means that CMSQY’s stock grew similarly to PIPR’s over the last 12 months.
PIPR's SMR Rating (43) in the null industry is in the same range as CMSQY (64). This means that PIPR’s stock grew similarly to CMSQY’s over the last 12 months.
CMSQY's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as PIPR (61). This means that CMSQY’s stock grew similarly to PIPR’s over the last 12 months.
CMSQY's P/E Growth Rating (32) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for PIPR (87). This means that CMSQY’s stock grew somewhat faster than PIPR’s over the last 12 months.
| CMSQY | PIPR | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 7 days ago 68% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 67% | 7 days ago 79% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 72% | 7 days ago 59% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 57% | 7 days ago 75% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 55% | 7 days ago 63% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 54% | 7 days ago 58% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 18 days ago 65% | 7 days ago 74% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 26 days ago 53% | 11 days ago 63% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 58% | 7 days ago 73% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 40% | 7 days ago 50% |
CMSQY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CMSQY and ASXFY have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CMSQY and ASXFY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CMSQY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMSQY | 100% | -2.26% | ||
| ASXFY - CMSQY | 32% Poorly correlated | -0.17% | ||
| GS - CMSQY | 30% Poorly correlated | -9.21% | ||
| EVR - CMSQY | 28% Poorly correlated | -15.48% | ||
| PIPR - CMSQY | 26% Poorly correlated | -11.17% | ||
| PJT - CMSQY | 25% Poorly correlated | -6.96% | ||
More | ||||
PIPR and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, PIPR has been closely correlated with EVR. These tickers have moved in lockstep 87% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if PIPR jumps, then EVR could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To PIPR | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIPR | 100% | -11.17% | ||
| EVR - PIPR | 87% Closely correlated | -15.48% | ||
| MC - PIPR | 84% Closely correlated | -11.96% | ||
| SF - PIPR | 80% Closely correlated | -10.87% | ||
| PJT - PIPR | 79% Closely correlated | -6.96% | ||
| GS - PIPR | 79% Closely correlated | -9.21% | ||
More | ||||