GZPZF
Price
$147.38
Change
+$8.38 (+6.03%)
Updated
Feb 20 closing price
Capitalization
4.52B
PLSDF
Price
$2.47
Change
+$0.15 (+6.47%)
Updated
Jul 3 closing price
Capitalization
82.4M
Interact to see
Advertisement

GZPZF vs PLSDF

Header iconGZPZF vs PLSDF Comparison
Open Charts GZPZF vs PLSDFBanner chart's image
Gaztransport Technigaz
Price$147.38
Change+$8.38 (+6.03%)
Volume$5.34K
Capitalization4.52B
Pulse Seismic
Price$2.47
Change+$0.15 (+6.47%)
Volume$53.75K
Capitalization82.4M
GZPZF vs PLSDF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
PLSDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GZPZF vs. PLSDF commentary
Jul 07, 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 GZPZF is a Buy and PLSDF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 07, 2025
Stock price -- (GZPZF: $147.38 vs. PLSDF: $2.47)
Brand notoriety: GZPZF and PLSDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Oilfield Services/Equipment industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GZPZF: 100% vs. PLSDF: 694%
Market capitalization -- GZPZF: $4.52B vs. PLSDF: $82.4M
GZPZF [@Oilfield Services/Equipment] is valued at $4.52B. PLSDF’s [@Oilfield Services/Equipment] market capitalization is $82.4M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Oilfield Services/Equipment] industry ranges from $79.1B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Oilfield Services/Equipment] industry is $3.83B.

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).

GZPZF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whilePLSDF’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

PLSDF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • PLSDF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.

Price Growth

GZPZF (@Oilfield Services/Equipment) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while PLSDF (@Oilfield Services/Equipment) price change was +10.90% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Oilfield Services/Equipment industry was +1.15%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +6.61%, and the average quarterly price growth was +5.68%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Oilfield Services/Equipment (+1.15% weekly)

The oilfield services/equipment industry is involved in providing various equipment and services to oil and natural gas producers. These companies rent drilling rigs and/or provide services to build and maintain oil and gas wells. The performance of this industry is dependent on demand for oil and natural gas, which in turn is often driven by macroeconomic conditions or business cycles. Schlumberger NV, Halliburton Company, and Baker Hughes are some of the biggest oilfield services companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
GZPZF($4.52B) has a higher market cap than PLSDF($82.4M). PLSDF has higher P/E ratio than GZPZF: PLSDF (39.84) vs GZPZF (23.92). PLSDF YTD gains are higher at: 48.976 vs. GZPZF (6.029). GZPZF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 183M vs. PLSDF (14.9M). GZPZF has more cash in the bank: 253M vs. PLSDF (9.69M). PLSDF has less debt than GZPZF: PLSDF (327K) vs GZPZF (6.5M). GZPZF has higher revenues than PLSDF: GZPZF (341M) vs PLSDF (21.8M).
GZPZFPLSDFGZPZF / PLSDF
Capitalization4.52B82.4M5,482%
EBITDA183M14.9M1,228%
Gain YTD6.02948.97612%
P/E Ratio23.9239.8460%
Revenue341M21.8M1,564%
Total Cash253M9.69M2,612%
Total Debt6.5M327K1,987%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GZPZF vs PLSDF: Fundamental Ratings
GZPZF
PLSDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
55
Fair valued
51
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
1726
SMR RATING
1..100
1417
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5838
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9422
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

PLSDF's Valuation (51) in the null industry is in the same range as GZPZF (55). This means that PLSDF’s stock grew similarly to GZPZF’s over the last 12 months.

GZPZF's Profit vs Risk Rating (17) in the null industry is in the same range as PLSDF (26). This means that GZPZF’s stock grew similarly to PLSDF’s over the last 12 months.

GZPZF's SMR Rating (14) in the null industry is in the same range as PLSDF (17). This means that GZPZF’s stock grew similarly to PLSDF’s over the last 12 months.

PLSDF's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as GZPZF (58). This means that PLSDF’s stock grew similarly to GZPZF’s over the last 12 months.

PLSDF's P/E Growth Rating (22) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for GZPZF (94). This means that PLSDF’s stock grew significantly faster than GZPZF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GZPZFPLSDF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
78%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
69%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
12%
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
66%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
12%
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
70%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 8 days ago
61%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
74%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
67%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
PLSDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
TLPFF102.901.36
+1.34%
Teleperformance
FKARX46.160.55
+1.21%
Franklin Growth Opportunities R
SOCLF0.27N/A
N/A
Pharos Energy PLC
ALPGF0.02N/A
N/A
Alpha Growth PLC
MNTHY58.02N/A
N/A
Minth Group, Ltd.

GZPZF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GZPZF has been loosely correlated with THNPF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GZPZF jumps, then THNPF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GZPZF
1D Price
Change %
GZPZF100%
N/A
THNPF - GZPZF
35%
Loosely correlated
N/A
PLSDF - GZPZF
15%
Poorly correlated
+6.59%
CESDF - GZPZF
2%
Poorly correlated
+4.89%
HGHAF - GZPZF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CTNR - GZPZF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

PLSDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that PLSDF and GZPZF have been poorly correlated (+15% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PLSDF and GZPZF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To PLSDF
1D Price
Change %
PLSDF100%
+6.59%
GZPZF - PLSDF
15%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PDER - PLSDF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
POFCF - PLSDF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HGHAF - PLSDF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NSFDF - PLSDF
-0%
Poorly correlated
-6.88%
More