Advertisement
ELMA vs FABP
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 ELMA is a Hold and FABP 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).
ELMA’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileFABP’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- ELMA’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- FABP’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 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.
ELMA’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while FABP’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- ELMA’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 3 bearish.
- FABP’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 1 bearish.
Price Growth
ELMA (@Regional Banks) experienced а +1.12% price change this week, while FABP (@Regional Banks) price change was +2.50% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -0.16%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.57%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.72%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (-0.16% weekly)Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.
| ELMA | FABP | ELMA / FABP | |
| Capitalization | 25.8M | 75.6M | 34% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 3.683 | 9.864 | 37% |
| P/E Ratio | 9.00 | 8.12 | 111% |
| Revenue | 15.7M | 39.2M | 40% |
| Total Cash | N/A | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 675K | 128M | 1% |
ELMA | FABP | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 86 | 48 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 47 Fair valued | 22 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 14 | 60 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 70 | 51 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 52 | 48 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 53 | 83 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 2 | 50 |
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.
FABP's Valuation (22) in the null industry is in the same range as ELMA (47). This means that FABP’s stock grew similarly to ELMA’s over the last 12 months.
ELMA's Profit vs Risk Rating (14) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FABP (60). This means that ELMA’s stock grew somewhat faster than FABP’s over the last 12 months.
FABP's SMR Rating (51) in the null industry is in the same range as ELMA (70). This means that FABP’s stock grew similarly to ELMA’s over the last 12 months.
FABP's Price Growth Rating (48) in the null industry is in the same range as ELMA (52). This means that FABP’s stock grew similarly to ELMA’s over the last 12 months.
ELMA's P/E Growth Rating (53) in the null industry is in the same range as FABP (83). This means that ELMA’s stock grew similarly to FABP’s over the last 12 months.
| ELMA | FABP | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 23% | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 22% | 2 days ago 28% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 40% | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 31% | 2 days ago 17% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 37% | 2 days ago 24% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 32% | 2 days ago 30% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 24 days ago 21% | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 35% | 2 days ago 27% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 29% | 2 days ago 38% |
Advertisement
ELMA and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that ELMA and KFFB have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that ELMA and KFFB's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ELMA | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ELMA | 100% | N/A | ||
| KFFB - ELMA | 24% Poorly correlated | +2.74% | ||
| FRST - ELMA | 22% Poorly correlated | +0.63% | ||
| CFIC - ELMA | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| VALIF - ELMA | 21% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| FUNC - ELMA | 21% Poorly correlated | +0.50% | ||
More | ||||
FABP and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that FABP and FCCT have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FABP and FCCT's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FABP | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FABP | 100% | N/A | ||
| FCCT - FABP | 21% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SOUB - FABP | 21% Poorly correlated | -1.14% | ||
| FXLG - FABP | 20% Poorly correlated | -1.19% | ||
| EGFEY - FABP | 20% Poorly correlated | -1.02% | ||
| ELMA - FABP | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||