Advertisement
GYUAF vs YASKY
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 GYUAF is a Hold and YASKY 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).
GYUAF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileYASKY’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- GYUAF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- YASKY’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.
YASKY’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- YASKY’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
GYUAF (@Auto Parts: OEM) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while YASKY (@Electrical Products) price change was -1.39% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Auto Parts: OEM industry was +1.50%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +5.26%, and the average quarterly price growth was +14.81%.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Electrical Products industry was +3.51%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +9.00%, and the average quarterly price growth was +12.65%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Auto Parts: OEM (+1.50% weekly)OEM or Original Equipment Manufacturer of auto parts refers to the original producer of a vehicles components, and so OEM car parts are usually identical to the parts used in producing the vehicle in the first place. OEM parts tend to fit the specifications of a particular model, and their compatibility is often guaranteed by the automaker itself. OEM parts could be more expensive to buy (compared to other vendors’ products) when a consumer goes for replacement. However, increased competition from aftermarket parts/third-party vendors could, in some cases, keep EOM prices in check. The industry might progress further in adopting newer technologies like 3D printing to boost supply chain performance and quality. Aptiv PLC, Magna International Inc. and BorgWarner Inc. are major OEMs for autos.
@Electrical Products (+3.51% weekly)The industry produces a diverse range of electricity-powered equipment, appliances and components, catering to both households and industries. The products include power, distribution and specialty transformers; electric motors, generators and motor-generator sets; switchgear and switchboard apparatus; light bulbs, tubes, fittings and electric signs etc. Consumer income, construction spending, and industrial production are major drivers of demand for this industry’s products. Large companies tend to have economies of scale in production, marketing, and distribution, while smaller companies can potentially carve out their own market through niche or specialty offerings. The US electrical products manufacturing industry includes about 5,700 establishments (single-location companies and units of multi-location companies) with combined annual revenue of about $125 billion. (according to a study published in First Research). Emerson Electric Co., Hubbell Incorporated and Eaton Corporation plc are major electrical products makers in the U.S.
| GYUAF | YASKY | GYUAF / YASKY | |
| Capitalization | 2.12B | 5.42B | 39% |
| EBITDA | 72.6B | 84.4B | 86% |
| Gain YTD | 3.796 | -18.021 | -21% |
| P/E Ratio | 8.52 | 14.63 | 58% |
| Revenue | 571B | 548B | 104% |
| Total Cash | 54.3B | 56.8B | 96% |
| Total Debt | 114B | 105B | 109% |
GYUAF | YASKY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 22 Undervalued | 92 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 100 | 62 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 52 | 63 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 18 | 92 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 30 | n/a |
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.
GYUAF's Valuation (22) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for YASKY (92). This means that GYUAF’s stock grew significantly faster than YASKY’s over the last 12 months.
GYUAF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as YASKY (100). This means that GYUAF’s stock grew similarly to YASKY’s over the last 12 months.
YASKY's SMR Rating (62) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GYUAF (100). This means that YASKY’s stock grew somewhat faster than GYUAF’s over the last 12 months.
GYUAF's Price Growth Rating (52) in the null industry is in the same range as YASKY (63). This means that GYUAF’s stock grew similarly to YASKY’s over the last 12 months.
GYUAF's P/E Growth Rating (18) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for YASKY (92). This means that GYUAF’s stock grew significantly faster than YASKY’s over the last 12 months.
| GYUAF | YASKY | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | N/A | 4 days ago 65% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | 4 days ago 68% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | 4 days ago 67% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 10% | 4 days ago 69% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 12% | 4 days ago 64% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 11 days ago 67% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | 20 days ago 69% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 4 days ago 82% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| CPSO | 26.56 | 0.03 | +0.11% |
| Calamos S&P 500 Str Alt Prt ETF-Oct | |||
| SCMB | 25.11 | 0.02 | +0.08% |
| Schwab Municipal Bond ETF | |||
| JUNZ | 31.53 | N/A | N/A |
| TrueShares Structured Outcome June ETF | |||
| UDEC | 37.43 | -0.06 | -0.16% |
| Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra BffrETF™-Dec | |||
| QQMG | 39.57 | -0.27 | -0.68% |
| Invesco ESG NASDAQ 100 ETF | |||
GYUAF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that GYUAF and EOSE have been poorly correlated (+4% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GYUAF and EOSE's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To GYUAF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GYUAF | 100% | N/A | ||
| EOSE - GYUAF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ZMTBY - GYUAF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| VARGF - GYUAF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PLPKF - GYUAF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| YASKY - GYUAF | -7% Poorly correlated | +1.58% | ||
More | ||||
YASKY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, YASKY has been loosely correlated with MIELY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 44% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if YASKY jumps, then MIELY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To YASKY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YASKY | 100% | +1.58% | ||
| MIELY - YASKY | 44% Loosely correlated | -0.62% | ||
| LGRDY - YASKY | 37% Loosely correlated | +1.17% | ||
| ABBNY - YASKY | 34% Loosely correlated | -0.41% | ||
| FELTY - YASKY | 30% Poorly correlated | +0.95% | ||
| PRYMY - YASKY | 27% Poorly correlated | +0.85% | ||
More | ||||