EQS
Price
$1.41
Change
+$0.01 (+0.71%)
Updated
Jul 3 closing price
Capitalization
20.28M
RMGOF
Price
$8.03
Change
-$1.32 (-14.12%)
Updated
Nov 22 closing price
Capitalization
5.12B
Interact to see
Advertisement

EQS vs RMGOF

Header iconEQS vs RMGOF Comparison
Open Charts EQS vs RMGOFBanner chart's image
Equus Total Return
Price$1.41
Change+$0.01 (+0.71%)
Volume$8.79K
Capitalization20.28M
Remgro
Price$8.03
Change-$1.32 (-14.12%)
Volume$4.2K
Capitalization5.12B
EQS vs RMGOF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
EQS
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
EQS vs. RMGOF 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 EQS is a StrongBuy and RMGOF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 07, 2025
Stock price -- (EQS: $1.41 vs. RMGOF: $8.03)
Brand notoriety: EQS and RMGOF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: EQS: 89% vs. RMGOF: 100%
Market capitalization -- EQS: $20.28M vs. RMGOF: $5.12B
EQS [@Investment Managers] is valued at $20.28M. RMGOF’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $5.12B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $124.17B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $6.16B.

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).

EQS’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileRMGOF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • EQS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • RMGOF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, EQS is a better buy in the long-term than RMGOF.

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.

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

  • EQS’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.

Price Growth

EQS (@Investment Managers) experienced а +2.17% price change this week, while RMGOF (@Investment Managers) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was +2.13%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +6.49%, and the average quarterly price growth was +10.30%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (+2.13% weekly)

Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RMGOF($5.12B) has a higher market cap than EQS($20.3M). RMGOF has higher P/E ratio than EQS: RMGOF (6.93) vs EQS (1.85). EQS YTD gains are higher at: 28.182 vs. RMGOF (0.000). EQS has less debt than RMGOF: EQS (18M) vs RMGOF (16.3B). RMGOF has higher revenues than EQS: RMGOF (83.3B) vs EQS (15.1M).
EQSRMGOFEQS / RMGOF
Capitalization20.3M5.12B0%
EBITDAN/A9.41B-
Gain YTD28.1820.000-
P/E Ratio1.856.9327%
Revenue15.1M83.3B0%
Total CashN/A18.4B-
Total Debt18M16.3B0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
EQS vs RMGOF: Fundamental Ratings
EQS
RMGOF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
43
Fair valued
40
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
8939
SMR RATING
1..100
9698
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4174
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
269
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
75n/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.

RMGOF's Valuation (40) in the null industry is in the same range as EQS (43). This means that RMGOF’s stock grew similarly to EQS’s over the last 12 months.

RMGOF's Profit vs Risk Rating (39) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for EQS (89). This means that RMGOF’s stock grew somewhat faster than EQS’s over the last 12 months.

EQS's SMR Rating (96) in the null industry is in the same range as RMGOF (98). This means that EQS’s stock grew similarly to RMGOF’s over the last 12 months.

EQS's Price Growth Rating (41) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for RMGOF (74). This means that EQS’s stock grew somewhat faster than RMGOF’s over the last 12 months.

EQS's P/E Growth Rating (2) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for RMGOF (69). This means that EQS’s stock grew significantly faster than RMGOF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
EQSRMGOF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
73%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
90%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
68%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
87%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
60%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
24%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
60%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
21%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
58%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
90%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
50%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
EQS
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SROI32.150.17
+0.52%
Calamos Antetokounmpo Global Sus Eqs ETF
BSMW24.490.02
+0.08%
Invesco BulletShares 2032 Muncpl Bd ETF
INTF34.340.02
+0.06%
iShares International Equity Factor ETF
GVUS50.41N/A
N/A
Goldman Sachs MktBt Russell LgCpValEqETF
IBGA24.49-0.09
-0.36%
iShares iBonds Dec 2044 Term Trsy ETF

EQS and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that EQS and RMGOF have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that EQS and RMGOF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To EQS
1D Price
Change %
EQS100%
+0.71%
RMGOF - EQS
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
AB - EQS
21%
Poorly correlated
-0.34%
VINP - EQS
20%
Poorly correlated
+1.14%
FDUS - EQS
9%
Poorly correlated
+1.07%
ARCC - EQS
9%
Poorly correlated
+1.63%
More

RMGOF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RMGOF and HFAHF have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RMGOF and HFAHF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RMGOF
1D Price
Change %
RMGOF100%
N/A
HFAHF - RMGOF
32%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IDKFF - RMGOF
23%
Poorly correlated
+0.16%
EQS - RMGOF
22%
Poorly correlated
+0.71%
PNXPF - RMGOF
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SOLCF - RMGOF
6%
Poorly correlated
+1.28%
More