Advertisement
FLWS vs TBHC
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 FLWS is a StrongBuy and TBHC 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).
FLWS’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileTBHC’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- FLWS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- TBHC’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 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.
FLWS’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while TBHC’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- FLWS’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
- TBHC’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
FLWS (@Specialty Stores) experienced а -16.46% price change this week, while TBHC (@Home Improvement Chains) price change was -9.57% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Specialty Stores industry was +0.83%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.33%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.68%.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Home Improvement Chains industry was -2.16%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.37%, and the average quarterly price growth was +20.64%.
Reported Earning Dates
FLWS is expected to report earnings on Oct 30, 2025.
TBHC is expected to report earnings on Nov 27, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Specialty Stores (+0.83% weekly)The specialty stores sector includes companies dedicated to the sale of retail products focused on a single product category, such as clothing, carpet, books, or office supplies. A specialty store could face intense competition from big-box departmental chains, and therefore offering an adequate collection of the product type it specializes in is key in maintaining/growing its market.
@Home Improvement Chains (-2.16% weekly)The home improvement chains industry sells home improvement merchandise and do-it-yourself repair and building goods. Customers include individual contractors or construction managers on one hand; on the other hand, there are retail consumers who’d either buy raw materials/items from the store to do a project on their own, or pay extra for installation services. Products sold include fencing supplies, lumber materials, hardware, lighting fixtures, plumbing supplies, home decor items, bathroom remodel items, roofing materials, tools and wallboard to name a few. The Home Depot Inc., Lowe’s Companies, Inc. and Floor & Decor Holdings, Inc. are some of the biggest home improvement retailing companies in the U.S. Allowing all types of customers the flexibility to choose or buy products both offline and online and then having the products shipped to the respective sites/homes are some of the potential drivers of a home improvement chain’s popularity. Many big-box home improvement chains are looking to expand their overseas presence. Supply-chain efficiency and distribution management are some of the key ingredients to grow/make profit in this industry.
| FLWS | TBHC | FLWS / TBHC | |
| Capitalization | 300M | 38.2M | 785% |
| EBITDA | -144.3M | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -42.228 | 4.938 | -855% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 1.69B | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | 46.5M | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 271M | N/A | - |
FLWS | TBHC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 71 | 79 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 83 Overvalued | 50 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 98 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 85 | 41 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 1 | 97 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 44 |
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.
TBHC's Valuation (50) in the Specialty Stores industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FLWS (83) in the Internet Retail industry. This means that TBHC’s stock grew somewhat faster than FLWS’s over the last 12 months.
TBHC's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as FLWS (100) in the Internet Retail industry. This means that TBHC’s stock grew similarly to FLWS’s over the last 12 months.
FLWS's SMR Rating (98) in the Internet Retail industry is in the same range as TBHC (100) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that FLWS’s stock grew similarly to TBHC’s over the last 12 months.
TBHC's Price Growth Rating (41) in the Specialty Stores industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FLWS (85) in the Internet Retail industry. This means that TBHC’s stock grew somewhat faster than FLWS’s over the last 12 months.
FLWS's P/E Growth Rating (1) in the Internet Retail industry is significantly better than the same rating for TBHC (97) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that FLWS’s stock grew significantly faster than TBHC’s over the last 12 months.
| FLWS | TBHC | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 87% | 2 days ago 89% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 82% | 2 days ago 70% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 81% | 2 days ago 82% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 83% | 2 days ago 78% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 78% | 2 days ago 83% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 82% | 2 days ago 76% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 12 days ago 77% | 15 days ago 81% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 81% | 4 days ago 83% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 90% | 2 days ago 81% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 82% | 2 days ago 77% |
Advertisement
FLWS and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FLWS has been loosely correlated with RUSHA. These tickers have moved in lockstep 49% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FLWS jumps, then RUSHA could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FLWS | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLWS | 100% | -2.68% | ||
| RUSHA - FLWS | 49% Loosely correlated | -1.22% | ||
| LOW - FLWS | 47% Loosely correlated | -0.70% | ||
| HVT - FLWS | 47% Loosely correlated | -1.42% | ||
| HZO - FLWS | 46% Loosely correlated | -0.92% | ||
| RH - FLWS | 46% Loosely correlated | -0.62% | ||
More | ||||
TBHC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, TBHC has been loosely correlated with FLWS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 42% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if TBHC jumps, then FLWS could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To TBHC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBHC | 100% | -2.30% | ||
| FLWS - TBHC | 42% Loosely correlated | -2.68% | ||
| RH - TBHC | 36% Loosely correlated | -0.62% | ||
| ONEW - TBHC | 33% Poorly correlated | +0.95% | ||
| RUSHA - TBHC | 31% Poorly correlated | -1.22% | ||
| ASO - TBHC | 31% Poorly correlated | -0.79% | ||
More | ||||