CYSNF vs MFCO
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 CYSNF is a Hold and MFCO 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).
CYSNF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMFCO’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CYSNF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- MFCO’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CYSNF (@Telecommunications Equipment) experienced а -12.45% price change this week, while MFCO (@Telecommunications Equipment) price change was +7.27% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Telecommunications Equipment industry was -1.17%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +7.26%, and the average quarterly price growth was +24.49%.
Reported Earning Dates
MFCO is expected to report earnings on Nov 27, 2024.
Industries' Descriptions
@Telecommunications Equipment (-1.17% weekly)The Telecommunications Equipment industry produces voice and data communications equipment, which includes fiber optic delivery products, digital signal processors, high-speed voice, data and video delivery. Additionally, satellite systems, global positioning systems, wireless data systems, personal communications equipment, telephone handsets and payload equipment for satellites also fall into this category. Apple Inc., QUALCOMM Incorporated and Nokia are major global players in this segment.
| CYSNF | MFCO | CYSNF / MFCO | |
| Capitalization | 43.7M | 2.06M | 2,118% |
| EBITDA | -583.93K | 196K | -298% |
| Gain YTD | -12.118 | 9.091 | -133% |
| P/E Ratio | 3160.90 | 13.37 | 23,644% |
| Revenue | 7.37M | 3.76M | 196% |
| Total Cash | 16M | 538K | 2,974% |
| Total Debt | N/A | 232K | - |
CYSNF | MFCO | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 21 | 93 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 4 Undervalued | 43 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 77 | 64 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 86 | 64 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 100 | 28 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 95 | n/a |
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.
CYSNF's Valuation (4) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MFCO (43). This means that CYSNF’s stock grew somewhat faster than MFCO’s over the last 12 months.
CYSNF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as MFCO (100). This means that CYSNF’s stock grew similarly to MFCO’s over the last 12 months.
MFCO's SMR Rating (64) in the null industry is in the same range as CYSNF (77). This means that MFCO’s stock grew similarly to CYSNF’s over the last 12 months.
MFCO's Price Growth Rating (64) in the null industry is in the same range as CYSNF (86). This means that MFCO’s stock grew similarly to CYSNF’s over the last 12 months.
MFCO's P/E Growth Rating (28) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CYSNF (100). This means that MFCO’s stock grew significantly faster than CYSNF’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 (%) |
CYSNF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CYSNF and BEWFF have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CYSNF and BEWFF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CYSNF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CYSNF | 100% | +0.85% | ||
| BEWFF - CYSNF | 25% Poorly correlated | -1.65% | ||
| AIRG - CYSNF | 23% Poorly correlated | +4.17% | ||
| MFCO - CYSNF | 6% Poorly correlated | +9.09% | ||
| ERIXF - CYSNF | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| EVTZF - CYSNF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
MFCO and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that MFCO and FKWL have been poorly correlated (+8% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MFCO and FKWL's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MFCO | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MFCO | 100% | +9.09% | ||
| FKWL - MFCO | 8% Poorly correlated | -0.80% | ||
| KPIFF - MFCO | 6% Poorly correlated | +11.86% | ||
| CYSNF - MFCO | 6% Poorly correlated | +0.85% | ||
| EVTZF - MFCO | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ETCIA - MFCO | 2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||