FNCSF
Price
$5.70
Change
-$0.15 (-2.56%)
Updated
Sep 24 closing price
Capitalization
339.55M
GBLBF
Price
$87.69
Change
-$0.49 (-0.56%)
Updated
Sep 24 closing price
Capitalization
10.68B
Interact to see
Advertisement

FNCSF vs GBLBF

Header iconFNCSF vs GBLBF Comparison
Open Charts FNCSF vs GBLBFBanner chart's image
North American Financial 15 Split
Price$5.70
Change-$0.15 (-2.56%)
Volume$100
Capitalization339.55M
Groupe Bruxelles Lambert SA
Price$87.69
Change-$0.49 (-0.56%)
Volume$1K
Capitalization10.68B
FNCSF vs GBLBF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
FNCSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GBLBF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
FNCSF vs. GBLBF commentary
Sep 29, 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 FNCSF is a Hold and GBLBF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 29, 2025
Stock price -- (FNCSF: $5.70 vs. GBLBF: $87.69)
Brand notoriety: FNCSF and GBLBF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: FNCSF: 6% vs. GBLBF: 210%
Market capitalization -- FNCSF: $339.55M vs. GBLBF: $10.68B
FNCSF [@Investment Managers] is valued at $339.55M. GBLBF’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $10.68B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $179.08B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $7.43B.

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).

FNCSF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileGBLBF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • FNCSF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • GBLBF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, FNCSF is a better buy in the long-term than GBLBF.

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.

FNCSF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GBLBF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • FNCSF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • GBLBF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, GBLBF is a better buy in the short-term than FNCSF.

Price Growth

FNCSF (@Investment Managers) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while GBLBF (@Investment Managers) price change was +0.30% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -1.95%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.07%, and the average quarterly price growth was +39.07%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (-1.95% 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
GBLBF($10.7B) has a higher market cap than FNCSF($340M). GBLBF has higher P/E ratio than FNCSF: GBLBF (316.39) vs FNCSF (2.87). GBLBF YTD gains are higher at: 29.336 vs. FNCSF (14.000).
FNCSFGBLBFFNCSF / GBLBF
Capitalization340M10.7B3%
EBITDAN/A786M-
Gain YTD14.00029.33648%
P/E Ratio2.87316.391%
RevenueN/A6.09B-
Total CashN/A3.37B-
Total DebtN/A7.39B-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
FNCSF vs GBLBF: Fundamental Ratings
FNCSF
GBLBF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
2
Undervalued
12
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
57100
SMR RATING
1..100
9592
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4552
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
171
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5075

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.

FNCSF's Valuation (2) in the null industry is in the same range as GBLBF (12). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew similarly to GBLBF’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (57) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GBLBF (100). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GBLBF’s over the last 12 months.

GBLBF's SMR Rating (92) in the null industry is in the same range as FNCSF (95). This means that GBLBF’s stock grew similarly to FNCSF’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's Price Growth Rating (45) in the null industry is in the same range as GBLBF (52). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew similarly to GBLBF’s over the last 12 months.

GBLBF's P/E Growth Rating (1) in the null industry is in the same range as FNCSF (17). This means that GBLBF’s stock grew similarly to FNCSF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
FNCSFGBLBF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
57%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
46%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
51%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
58%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
40%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
54%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
45%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
57%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
37%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
51%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
47%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 13 days ago
35%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 25 days ago
74%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
53%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
49%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
47%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
FNCSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GBLBF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
FDVLX14.420.15
+1.05%
Fidelity Value
CSFAX55.050.51
+0.94%
Cohen & Steers Global Realty A
TANDX37.400.25
+0.67%
Castle Tandem No-Load
WPASX54.710.27
+0.50%
AB Concentrated Growth A
ZEMIX13.74-0.12
-0.87%
American Beacon Ninety One Emr Mkts EqR5

FNCSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FNCSF has been loosely correlated with JFHHF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 44% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FNCSF jumps, then JFHHF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FNCSF
1D Price
Change %
FNCSF100%
N/A
JFHHF - FNCSF
44%
Loosely correlated
N/A
GBLBF - FNCSF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IGIFF - FNCSF
22%
Poorly correlated
-0.88%
SHNWF - FNCSF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JBARF - FNCSF
21%
Poorly correlated
-3.67%
More

GBLBF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GBLBF and FNCSF have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GBLBF and FNCSF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GBLBF
1D Price
Change %
GBLBF100%
N/A
FNCSF - GBLBF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IOOFF - GBLBF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WNMLA - GBLBF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GCMG - GBLBF
10%
Poorly correlated
-0.97%
JFHHF - GBLBF
9%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More