FNCSF
Price
$7.23
Change
+$0.21 (+2.99%)
Updated
Dec 26 closing price
Capitalization
351.46M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
TRNLY
Price
$2.70
Change
+$0.29 (+12.03%)
Updated
Dec 19 closing price
Capitalization
71.95M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

FNCSF vs TRNLY

Header iconFNCSF vs TRNLY Comparison
Open Charts FNCSF vs TRNLYBanner chart's image
North American Financial 15 Split
Price$7.23
Change+$0.21 (+2.99%)
Volume$6.6K
Capitalization351.46M
The Trendlines Group
Price$2.70
Change+$0.29 (+12.03%)
Volume$100
Capitalization71.95M
FNCSF vs TRNLY Comparison Chart in %
FNCSF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
TRNLY
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
FNCSF vs. TRNLY commentary
Dec 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 Buy and TRNLY is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 29, 2025
Stock price -- (FNCSF: $7.23 vs. TRNLY: $2.70)
Brand notoriety: FNCSF and TRNLY are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: FNCSF: 178% vs. TRNLY: 1%
Market capitalization -- FNCSF: $351.46M vs. TRNLY: $71.95M
FNCSF [@Investment Managers] is valued at $351.46M. TRNLY’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $71.95M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $168.82B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $7.54B.

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 3 FA rating(s) are green whileTRNLY’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • FNCSF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
  • TRNLY’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, FNCSF is a better buy in the long-term than TRNLY.

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 TRNLY’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

FNCSF (@Investment Managers) experienced а +18.52% price change this week, while TRNLY (@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 +0.91%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.38%, and the average quarterly price growth was +12.03%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (+0.91% 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
FNCSF($351M) has a higher market cap than TRNLY($71.9M). TRNLY YTD gains are higher at: 69.811 vs. FNCSF (44.600). FNCSF has higher revenues than TRNLY: FNCSF (200M) vs TRNLY (643K).
FNCSFTRNLYFNCSF / TRNLY
Capitalization351M71.9M488%
EBITDAN/A-14.99M-
Gain YTD44.60069.81164%
P/E Ratio2.99N/A-
Revenue200M643K31,104%
Total CashN/A2.89M-
Total DebtN/A5.45M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
FNCSF vs TRNLY: Fundamental Ratings
FNCSF
TRNLY
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
1
Undervalued
70
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
50100
SMR RATING
1..100
1896
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3936
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
2390
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
352

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 significantly better than the same rating for TRNLY (70). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew significantly faster than TRNLY’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (50) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for TRNLY (100). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than TRNLY’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's SMR Rating (18) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for TRNLY (96). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew significantly faster than TRNLY’s over the last 12 months.

TRNLY's Price Growth Rating (36) in the null industry is in the same range as FNCSF (39). This means that TRNLY’s stock grew similarly to FNCSF’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's P/E Growth Rating (23) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for TRNLY (90). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew significantly faster than TRNLY’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
FNCSFTRNLY
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
64%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
38%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
64%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
44%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
36%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
28%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
55%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
36%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
48%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
37%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend about 1 month ago
45%
Bullish Trend 10 days ago
21%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
62%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
39%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
44%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
26%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
FNCSF
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
TRNLY
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
CRYPTO / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
BTC.X87802.160000500.726560
+0.57%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
SPY690.31-0.07
-0.01%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF
AAPL273.40-0.41
-0.15%
Apple
GME21.09-0.44
-2.04%
GameStop Corp
TSLA475.19-10.21
-2.10%
Tesla

FNCSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that FNCSF and BLK have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FNCSF and BLK's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FNCSF
1D Price
Change %
FNCSF100%
+2.99%
BLK - FNCSF
30%
Poorly correlated
-0.08%
PFG - FNCSF
30%
Poorly correlated
-0.23%
BCSF - FNCSF
28%
Poorly correlated
+0.80%
WNDLF - FNCSF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SEIC - FNCSF
27%
Poorly correlated
-0.61%
More

TRNLY and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, TRNLY has been loosely correlated with NINTF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 45% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if TRNLY jumps, then NINTF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To TRNLY
1D Price
Change %
TRNLY100%
N/A
NINTF - TRNLY
45%
Loosely correlated
N/A
HNNA - TRNLY
23%
Poorly correlated
+1.28%
ELRNF - TRNLY
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FNNCF - TRNLY
2%
Poorly correlated
+4.70%
FNCSF - TRNLY
1%
Poorly correlated
+2.99%
More