CUCSF vs PTTWF
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 CUCSF is a Hold and PTTWF 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).
CUCSF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whilePTTWF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- CUCSF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- PTTWF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
Price Growth
CUCSF (@Wireless Telecommunications) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while PTTWF (@Wireless Telecommunications) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Wireless Telecommunications industry was -0.51%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.83%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.63%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Wireless Telecommunications (-0.51% 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.
| CUCSF | PTTWF | CUCSF / PTTWF | |
| Capitalization | 3.29B | 2.42B | 136% |
| EBITDA | 3.79B | 3.95B | 96% |
| Gain YTD | 0.000 | 17.816 | - |
| P/E Ratio | 7.86 | 13.59 | 58% |
| Revenue | 139B | 12.9B | 1,078% |
| Total Cash | 19.5B | 724M | 2,693% |
| Total Debt | 2.53B | 7.12B | 36% |
CUCSF | PTTWF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 38 | 39 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 17 Undervalued | 21 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 70 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 75 | 81 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 69 | 48 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 78 | 23 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 16 |
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.
CUCSF's Valuation (17) in the null industry is in the same range as PTTWF (21). This means that CUCSF’s stock grew similarly to PTTWF’s over the last 12 months.
PTTWF's Profit vs Risk Rating (70) in the null industry is in the same range as CUCSF (100). This means that PTTWF’s stock grew similarly to CUCSF’s over the last 12 months.
CUCSF's SMR Rating (75) in the null industry is in the same range as PTTWF (81). This means that CUCSF’s stock grew similarly to PTTWF’s over the last 12 months.
PTTWF's Price Growth Rating (48) in the null industry is in the same range as CUCSF (69). This means that PTTWF’s stock grew similarly to CUCSF’s over the last 12 months.
PTTWF's P/E Growth Rating (23) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CUCSF (78). This means that PTTWF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CUCSF’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 (%) |
CUCSF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CUCSF and TTRAF have been poorly correlated (+17% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CUCSF and TTRAF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CUCSF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CUCSF | 100% | N/A | ||
| TTRAF - CUCSF | 17% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HTWSF - CUCSF | 5% Poorly correlated | -0.83% | ||
| KORE - CUCSF | 3% Poorly correlated | -1.68% | ||
| MYTEF - CUCSF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| FRTAY - CUCSF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
PTTWF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that PTTWF and TLSNF have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PTTWF and TLSNF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To PTTWF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PTTWF | 100% | N/A | ||
| TLSNF - PTTWF | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BCE - PTTWF | 22% Poorly correlated | -1.17% | ||
| HTWSF - PTTWF | 2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CUCSF - PTTWF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LMGHF - PTTWF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||