Advertisement
CSBTF vs CYBQY
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 CSBTF is a Hold and CYBQY 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).
CSBTF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCYBQY’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- CSBTF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- CYBQY’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 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.
CSBTF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CYBQY’s TA Score has 7 bullish TA indicator(s).
- CSBTF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
- CYBQY’s TA Score: 7 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
CSBTF (@Medical/Nursing Services) experienced а -5.13% price change this week, while CYBQY (@Medical/Nursing Services) price change was -15.61% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Medical/Nursing Services industry was +7.68%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +8.00%, and the average quarterly price growth was +7.22%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Medical/Nursing Services (+7.68% weekly)The medical/nursing services includes companies that provide medical-related services such as ambulance services, dialysis centers, respiratory therapy, blood testing and rehabilitation services. DaVita Inc., Chemed Corporation and Guardant Health, Inc. are examples of companies in this industry.
| CSBTF | CYBQY | CSBTF / CYBQY | |
| Capitalization | 1.29B | 308M | 419% |
| EBITDA | -561K | 73M | -1% |
| Gain YTD | 50.642 | 19.883 | 255% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 75.6M | 4.39B | 2% |
| Total Cash | 17.5M | 15.6B | 0% |
| Total Debt | 1.79M | 536M | 0% |
CSBTF | CYBQY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 80 | 92 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 54 Fair valued | 99 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 21 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 93 | 95 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 38 | 40 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 75 |
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.
CSBTF's Valuation (54) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CYBQY (99). This means that CSBTF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CYBQY’s over the last 12 months.
CSBTF's Profit vs Risk Rating (21) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CYBQY (100). This means that CSBTF’s stock grew significantly faster than CYBQY’s over the last 12 months.
CSBTF's SMR Rating (93) in the null industry is in the same range as CYBQY (95). This means that CSBTF’s stock grew similarly to CYBQY’s over the last 12 months.
CSBTF's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as CYBQY (40). This means that CSBTF’s stock grew similarly to CYBQY’s over the last 12 months.
CSBTF's P/E Growth Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as CYBQY (100). This means that CSBTF’s stock grew similarly to CYBQY’s over the last 12 months.
| CSBTF | CYBQY | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 71% | 3 days ago 69% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 70% | 3 days ago 76% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 48% | 3 days ago 56% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 33% | 3 days ago 50% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 49% | 3 days ago 64% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 40% | 3 days ago 37% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 21 days ago 86% | 7 days ago 48% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 62% | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 56% | 3 days ago 81% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 85% | 3 days ago 54% |
Advertisement
CSBTF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CSBTF has been loosely correlated with VVOS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 51% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CSBTF jumps, then VVOS could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CSBTF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CSBTF | 100% | -2.16% | ||
| VVOS - CSBTF | 51% Loosely correlated | -10.85% | ||
| INBS - CSBTF | 23% Poorly correlated | -0.68% | ||
| BIOQ - CSBTF | 21% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| DSRLF - CSBTF | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CHEOY - CSBTF | 2% Poorly correlated | +3.10% | ||
More | ||||
CYBQY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CYBQY and SLDX have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CYBQY and SLDX's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CYBQY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CYBQY | 100% | -16.17% | ||
| SLDX - CYBQY | 20% Poorly correlated | -46.67% | ||
| MMSI - CYBQY | 20% Poorly correlated | +0.34% | ||
| CYBQF - CYBQY | 7% Poorly correlated | -8.80% | ||
| CSBTF - CYBQY | 1% Poorly correlated | -2.16% | ||
| CNVVY - CYBQY | 0% Poorly correlated | -2.31% | ||
More | ||||