FNCSF
Price
$5.37
Change
+$0.05 (+0.94%)
Updated
Sep 5 closing price
Capitalization
319.89M
GBLBF
Price
$88.71
Change
+$1.45 (+1.66%)
Updated
Aug 19 closing price
Capitalization
10.79B
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$5.37
Change+$0.05 (+0.94%)
Volume$700
Capitalization319.89M
Groupe Bruxelles Lambert SA
Price$88.71
Change+$1.45 (+1.66%)
Volume$665
Capitalization10.79B
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 08, 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 08, 2025
Stock price -- (FNCSF: $5.37 vs. GBLBF: $88.71)
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: 52% vs. GBLBF: 198%
Market capitalization -- FNCSF: $319.89M vs. GBLBF: $10.79B
FNCSF [@Investment Managers] is valued at $319.89M. GBLBF’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $10.79B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $170.21B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $7.56B.

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, 5 bearish.
  • GBLBF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 1 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 -0.37% price change this week, while GBLBF (@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 -0.26%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.60%, and the average quarterly price growth was +44.82%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (-0.26% 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($10.8B) has a higher market cap than FNCSF($320M). GBLBF has higher P/E ratio than FNCSF: GBLBF (316.39) vs FNCSF (2.68). GBLBF YTD gains are higher at: 30.841 vs. FNCSF (7.400).
FNCSFGBLBFFNCSF / GBLBF
Capitalization320M10.8B3%
EBITDAN/A786M-
Gain YTD7.40030.84124%
P/E Ratio2.68316.391%
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
1
Undervalued
11
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
56100
SMR RATING
1..100
9692
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4649
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
161
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
3665

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 (1) in the null industry is in the same range as GBLBF (11). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew similarly to GBLBF’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (56) 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 (96). This means that GBLBF’s stock grew similarly to FNCSF’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's Price Growth Rating (46) in the null industry is in the same range as GBLBF (49). 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 (16). 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 4 days ago
57%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
47%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
61%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
48%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
57%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
55%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
37%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
60%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
37%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
50%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
45%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
33%
Bullish Trend 27 days ago
30%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
74%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
60%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
49%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
49%
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
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
AGIX34.190.36
+1.06%
KraneShares Artfcl Intllgnc and Tech ETF
GSID65.790.16
+0.24%
Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Intl Eq ETF
BAMA32.810.05
+0.15%
Brookstone Active ETF
IVW115.99-0.11
-0.09%
iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF
PIN25.35-0.10
-0.39%
Invesco India ETF

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%
+0.94%
JFHHF - FNCSF
44%
Loosely correlated
N/A
GBLBF - FNCSF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IGIFF - FNCSF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SHNWF - FNCSF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JBARF - FNCSF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
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
+0.94%
IOOFF - GBLBF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WNMLA - GBLBF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GCMG - GBLBF
10%
Poorly correlated
+0.39%
JFHHF - GBLBF
9%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More