CTXXF
Price
$0.25
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 26 closing price
Capitalization
36.76M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
HLBZF
Price
$254.71
Change
-$17.78 (-6.53%)
Updated
Dec 26 closing price
Capitalization
46.66B
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

CTXXF vs HLBZF

Header iconCTXXF vs HLBZF Comparison
Open Charts CTXXF vs HLBZFBanner chart's image
Cematrix
Price$0.25
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$10.2K
Capitalization36.76M
HEIDELBERG MATERIALS AG
Price$254.71
Change-$17.78 (-6.53%)
Volume$163
Capitalization46.66B
CTXXF vs HLBZF Comparison Chart in %
CTXXF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
HLBZF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CTXXF vs. HLBZF commentary
Dec 28, 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 CTXXF is a Hold and HLBZF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 28, 2025
Stock price -- (CTXXF: $0.25 vs. HLBZF: $254.71)
Brand notoriety: CTXXF and HLBZF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Construction Materials industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CTXXF: 37% vs. HLBZF: 37%
Market capitalization -- CTXXF: $36.76M vs. HLBZF: $46.66B
CTXXF [@Construction Materials] is valued at $36.76M. HLBZF’s [@Construction Materials] market capitalization is $46.66B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Construction Materials] industry ranges from $86.27B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Construction Materials] industry is $11.05B.

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).

CTXXF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileHLBZF’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

  • CTXXF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • HLBZF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
According to our system of comparison, HLBZF is a better buy in the long-term than CTXXF.

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.

CTXXF’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while HLBZF’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CTXXF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • HLBZF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CTXXF is a better buy in the short-term than HLBZF.

Price Growth

CTXXF (@Construction Materials) experienced а -0.74% price change this week, while HLBZF (@Construction Materials) price change was +0.37% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Construction Materials industry was +14.90%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +15.32%, and the average quarterly price growth was +24.07%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Construction Materials (+14.90% weekly)

Many naturally occurring substances, such as clay, rocks, sand, and wood, even twigs and leaves have been used in construction material. Many man-made products are also in use. Vulcan Materials Co., Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. and Owens Corning Inc. are examples of construction material companies in the U.S. Performance of companies that extract or produce construction materials could at times depend on demand for residential and commercial buildings/real estate, and therefore in some cases could feel impacted by economic cycles.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
HLBZF($46.7B) has a higher market cap than CTXXF($36.8M). HLBZF has higher P/E ratio than CTXXF: HLBZF (20.83) vs CTXXF (16.29). HLBZF YTD gains are higher at: 102.956 vs. CTXXF (38.274). HLBZF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 4.57B vs. CTXXF (6.58M). HLBZF has more cash in the bank: 1.33B vs. CTXXF (9.95M). CTXXF has less debt than HLBZF: CTXXF (3.81M) vs HLBZF (8.66B). HLBZF has higher revenues than CTXXF: HLBZF (21.6B) vs CTXXF (42.9M).
CTXXFHLBZFCTXXF / HLBZF
Capitalization36.8M46.7B0%
EBITDA6.58M4.57B0%
Gain YTD38.274102.95637%
P/E Ratio16.2920.8378%
Revenue42.9M21.6B0%
Total Cash9.95M1.33B1%
Total Debt3.81M8.66B0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CTXXF vs HLBZF: Fundamental Ratings
CTXXF
HLBZF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
76
Overvalued
17
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10011
SMR RATING
1..100
7695
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4843
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
8811
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5090

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.

HLBZF's Valuation (17) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CTXXF (76). This means that HLBZF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CTXXF’s over the last 12 months.

HLBZF's Profit vs Risk Rating (11) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CTXXF (100). This means that HLBZF’s stock grew significantly faster than CTXXF’s over the last 12 months.

CTXXF's SMR Rating (76) in the null industry is in the same range as HLBZF (95). This means that CTXXF’s stock grew similarly to HLBZF’s over the last 12 months.

HLBZF's Price Growth Rating (43) in the null industry is in the same range as CTXXF (48). This means that HLBZF’s stock grew similarly to CTXXF’s over the last 12 months.

HLBZF's P/E Growth Rating (11) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CTXXF (88). This means that HLBZF’s stock grew significantly faster than CTXXF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CTXXFHLBZF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
89%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
79%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
51%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
70%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
54%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
48%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
76%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
51%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
61%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
74%
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
58%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
72%
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
49%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
69%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
72%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CTXXF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
HLBZF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
CNND210.00N/A
N/A
Canandaigua National Corp.
KDOZF0.28N/A
N/A
Kidoz Inc.
KKKUF14.60N/A
N/A
Kakaku.com, Inc.
SRKE0.17N/A
N/A
Strake Inc.
SPXCF14.00-0.05
-0.36%
Singapore Exchange Ltd.

CTXXF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CTXXF and CMTOY have been poorly correlated (+7% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CTXXF and CMTOY's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CTXXF
1D Price
Change %
CTXXF100%
+0.08%
CMTOY - CTXXF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GCWOF - CTXXF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HLBZF - CTXXF
3%
Poorly correlated
-6.53%
IBJHF - CTXXF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HCMLF - CTXXF
2%
Poorly correlated
+1.33%
More

HLBZF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HLBZF
1D Price
Change %
HLBZF100%
-6.53%
HDLMY - HLBZF
24%
Poorly correlated
+0.40%
VMC - HLBZF
23%
Poorly correlated
+0.19%
BCC - HLBZF
23%
Poorly correlated
+0.56%
CRH - HLBZF
21%
Poorly correlated
+1.10%
EXP - HLBZF
20%
Poorly correlated
+0.47%
More