CXMSF
Price
$0.70
Change
+$0.04 (+6.06%)
Updated
Jun 25 closing price
Capitalization
11.5B
SUCEF
Price
$26.05
Change
+$2.55 (+10.85%)
Updated
Mar 8 closing price
Capitalization
970.15M
Interact to see
Advertisement

CXMSF vs SUCEF

Header iconCXMSF vs SUCEF Comparison
Open Charts CXMSF vs SUCEFBanner chart's image
Cemex S.A.B de C.V
Price$0.70
Change+$0.04 (+6.06%)
Volume$501.68K
Capitalization11.5B
Sumitomo Osaka Cement
Price$26.05
Change+$2.55 (+10.85%)
Volume$682
Capitalization970.15M
CXMSF vs SUCEF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CXMSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CXMSF vs. SUCEF commentary
Jul 07, 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 CXMSF is a Buy and SUCEF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 07, 2025
Stock price -- (CXMSF: $0.70 vs. SUCEF: $26.05)
Brand notoriety: CXMSF and SUCEF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Construction Materials industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CXMSF: 75% vs. SUCEF: 100%
Market capitalization -- CXMSF: $11.5B vs. SUCEF: $970.15M
CXMSF [@Construction Materials] is valued at $11.5B. SUCEF’s [@Construction Materials] market capitalization is $970.15M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Construction Materials] industry ranges from $59.37B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Construction Materials] industry is $8.92B.

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).

CXMSF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSUCEF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • CXMSF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • SUCEF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, CXMSF is a better buy in the long-term than SUCEF.

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.

CXMSF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • CXMSF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 2 bearish.

Price Growth

CXMSF (@Construction Materials) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SUCEF (@Construction Materials) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Construction Materials industry was +2.75%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.00%, and the average quarterly price growth was +12.20%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Construction Materials (+2.75% 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
CXMSF($11.5B) has a higher market cap than SUCEF($970M). SUCEF has higher P/E ratio than CXMSF: SUCEF (14.77) vs CXMSF (4.88). CXMSF YTD gains are higher at: 31.995 vs. SUCEF (0.000). CXMSF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.69B vs. SUCEF (-1.31B). SUCEF has more cash in the bank: 17.6B vs. CXMSF (471M). CXMSF has less debt than SUCEF: CXMSF (9.16B) vs SUCEF (96.3B). SUCEF has higher revenues than CXMSF: SUCEF (198B) vs CXMSF (16.4B).
CXMSFSUCEFCXMSF / SUCEF
Capitalization11.5B970M1,186%
EBITDA1.69B-1.31B-129%
Gain YTD31.9950.000-
P/E Ratio4.8814.7733%
Revenue16.4B198B8%
Total Cash471M17.6B3%
Total Debt9.16B96.3B10%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CXMSF vs SUCEF: Fundamental Ratings
CXMSF
SUCEF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
19
Undervalued
9
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
49100
SMR RATING
1..100
6399
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4371
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9897
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
8550

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.

SUCEF's Valuation (9) in the null industry is in the same range as CXMSF (19). This means that SUCEF’s stock grew similarly to CXMSF’s over the last 12 months.

CXMSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (49) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SUCEF (100). This means that CXMSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SUCEF’s over the last 12 months.

CXMSF's SMR Rating (63) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SUCEF (99). This means that CXMSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SUCEF’s over the last 12 months.

CXMSF's Price Growth Rating (43) in the null industry is in the same range as SUCEF (71). This means that CXMSF’s stock grew similarly to SUCEF’s over the last 12 months.

SUCEF's P/E Growth Rating (97) in the null industry is in the same range as CXMSF (98). This means that SUCEF’s stock grew similarly to CXMSF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CXMSFSUCEF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
64%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
66%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
72%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
75%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
2%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
75%
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
2%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
78%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
83%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CXMSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
COMP6.420.09
+1.42%
Compass
MKTW19.990.25
+1.27%
MarketWise Inc
QRVO88.780.50
+0.57%
Qorvo
FCNCP21.410.01
+0.05%
First Citizens BancShares
ANIK11.25N/A
N/A
Anika Therapeutics

CXMSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CXMSF and BSND have been poorly correlated (+10% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CXMSF and BSND's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CXMSF
1D Price
Change %
CXMSF100%
N/A
BSND - CXMSF
10%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WBRBY - CXMSF
8%
Poorly correlated
-0.13%
XYIGF - CXMSF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
XYIGY - CXMSF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SUCEF - CXMSF
-2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

SUCEF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SUCEF has been loosely correlated with IBJHF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 58% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if SUCEF jumps, then IBJHF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SUCEF
1D Price
Change %
SUCEF100%
N/A
IBJHF - SUCEF
58%
Loosely correlated
N/A
XYIGY - SUCEF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WBRBY - SUCEF
5%
Poorly correlated
-0.13%
XYIGF - SUCEF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BSND - SUCEF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More