Advertisement
FAT vs FATBP
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 FAT is a Hold and FATBP 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).
FAT’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileFATBP’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- FAT’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- FATBP’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.
FAT’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while FATBP’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- FAT’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
- FATBP’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
FAT (@Restaurants) experienced а -37.46% price change this week, while FATBP (@Restaurants) price change was -81.23% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Restaurants industry was +1.47%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.96%, and the average quarterly price growth was -6.97%.
Reported Earning Dates
FAT is expected to report earnings on Mar 25, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Restaurants (+1.47% weekly)The industry includes companies that operate full-service restaurants, fast food restaurants, cafeterias and snack bars. McDonald`s Corporation, Starbucks Corporation, YUM! Brands, Inc. and Restaurant Brands International Inc. are some of the largest U.S. restaurant-owning companies in terms of market capitalization. While restaurant spending could be viewed as discretionary for consumers, some companies in the business have been able to weather economic cycles by establishing strong loyalty among customers over the years. Many of them also have a strong global presence as well.
| FAT | FATBP | FAT / FATBP | |
| Capitalization | 3.84M | N/A | - |
| EBITDA | -45.09M | -45.09M | 100% |
| Gain YTD | -48.315 | -74.142 | 65% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 574M | 574M | 100% |
| Total Cash | 2.05M | 2.05M | 100% |
| Total Debt | 1.48B | 1.48B | 100% |
FAT | ||
|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 29 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 2 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 98 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 75 |
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.
| FAT | FATBP | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 83% | 2 days ago 51% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 76% | 2 days ago 54% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 71% | 2 days ago 59% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 67% | 2 days ago 59% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 77% | 2 days ago 65% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 78% | 2 days ago 69% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 10 days ago 80% | 10 days ago 59% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 78% | 6 days ago 66% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 83% | 2 days ago 54% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 77% | 2 days ago 74% |
Advertisement
FAT and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FAT has been loosely correlated with FATBB. These tickers have moved in lockstep 41% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FAT jumps, then FATBB could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FAT | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAT | 100% | -22.57% | ||
| FATBB - FAT | 41% Loosely correlated | +15.87% | ||
| FATBP - FAT | 32% Poorly correlated | -13.72% | ||
| DIN - FAT | 31% Poorly correlated | -1.27% | ||
| CNNE - FAT | 30% Poorly correlated | -1.52% | ||
| SBUX - FAT | 30% Poorly correlated | +1.47% | ||
More | ||||
FATBP and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FATBP has been loosely correlated with TWNP. These tickers have moved in lockstep 47% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FATBP jumps, then TWNP could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FATBP | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FATBP | 100% | -13.72% | ||
| TWNP - FATBP | 47% Loosely correlated | -40.80% | ||
| HDL - FATBP | 27% Poorly correlated | -0.86% | ||
| CNNE - FATBP | 26% Poorly correlated | -1.52% | ||
| FAT - FATBP | 24% Poorly correlated | -22.57% | ||
| RICK - FATBP | 23% Poorly correlated | -0.62% | ||
More | ||||