HGBL
Price
$1.91
Change
-$0.01 (-0.52%)
Updated
Aug 15 closing price
Capitalization
66.36M
81 days until earnings call
MC
Price
$72.08
Change
-$2.27 (-3.05%)
Updated
Aug 15 closing price
Capitalization
5.35B
73 days until earnings call
Interact to see
Advertisement

HGBL vs MC

Header iconHGBL vs MC Comparison
Open Charts HGBL vs MCBanner chart's image
Heritage Global
Price$1.91
Change-$0.01 (-0.52%)
Volume$18.06K
Capitalization66.36M
Moelis & Company
Price$72.08
Change-$2.27 (-3.05%)
Volume$569.16K
Capitalization5.35B
HGBL vs MC Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
HGBL
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MC
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
HGBL vs. MC commentary
Aug 18, 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 HGBL is a Hold and MC is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 18, 2025
Stock price -- (HGBL: $1.91 vs. MC: $72.08)
Brand notoriety: HGBL and MC are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Banks/Brokers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: HGBL: 43% vs. MC: 65%
Market capitalization -- HGBL: $66.36M vs. MC: $5.35B
HGBL [@Investment Banks/Brokers] is valued at $66.36M. MC’s [@Investment Banks/Brokers] market capitalization is $5.35B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Banks/Brokers] industry ranges from $928.5B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Banks/Brokers] industry is $10.15B.

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).

HGBL’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMC’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

  • HGBL’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • MC’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
According to our system of comparison, MC is a better buy in the long-term than HGBL.

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.

HGBL’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MC’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • HGBL’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • MC’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, MC is a better buy in the short-term than HGBL.

Price Growth

HGBL (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а -4.50% price change this week, while MC (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was +2.94% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was +0.19%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.30%, and the average quarterly price growth was +12.08%.

Reported Earning Dates

HGBL is expected to report earnings on Nov 06, 2025.

MC is expected to report earnings on Oct 29, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Banks/Brokers (+0.19% weekly)

These banks specialize in underwriting (helping companies with debt financing or equity issuances), IPOs, facilitating mergers and other corporate reorganizations and acting as a broker or financial advisor for institutions. They might also trade securities on their own accounts. Investment banks potentially thrive on expanding its network of clients, since that could help them increase profits. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and CME Group Inc are some of the largest investment banking companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
MC($5.35B) has a higher market cap than HGBL($66.4M). MC has higher P/E ratio than HGBL: MC (28.16) vs HGBL (19.10). HGBL YTD gains are higher at: 3.243 vs. MC (0.540). MC has more cash in the bank: 61.5M vs. HGBL (18.8M). HGBL has less debt than MC: HGBL (6.52M) vs MC (219M).
HGBLMCHGBL / MC
Capitalization66.4M5.35B1%
EBITDA9.88MN/A-
Gain YTD3.2430.540600%
P/E Ratio19.1028.1668%
Revenue46.7MN/A-
Total Cash18.8M61.5M31%
Total Debt6.52M219M3%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
HGBL vs MC: Fundamental Ratings
HGBL
MC
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
6379
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
83
Overvalued
19
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
9730
SMR RATING
1..100
7924
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
6345
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
5100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5050

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.

MC's Valuation (19) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HGBL (83) in the null industry. This means that MC’s stock grew somewhat faster than HGBL’s over the last 12 months.

MC's Profit vs Risk Rating (30) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry is significantly better than the same rating for HGBL (97) in the null industry. This means that MC’s stock grew significantly faster than HGBL’s over the last 12 months.

MC's SMR Rating (24) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HGBL (79) in the null industry. This means that MC’s stock grew somewhat faster than HGBL’s over the last 12 months.

MC's Price Growth Rating (45) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry is in the same range as HGBL (63) in the null industry. This means that MC’s stock grew similarly to HGBL’s over the last 12 months.

HGBL's P/E Growth Rating (5) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for MC (100) in the Investment Banks Or Brokers industry. This means that HGBL’s stock grew significantly faster than MC’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
HGBLMC
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
72%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
80%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
71%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
75%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
81%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
79%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
80%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
72%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
79%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
71%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
74%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
81%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
67%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
83%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
65%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
85%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
68%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
HGBL
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MC
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 %
DTRK1.090.23
+26.48%
DATATRAK International, Inc.
TKCOF62.01N/A
N/A
Toho Co., Ltd.
TOPCF22.28N/A
N/A
Topcon Corp.
TSRUF7.05N/A
N/A
Pacific Current Group Ltd.
KOGL57.00N/A
N/A
Kopp Glass, Inc.

HGBL and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that HGBL and SF have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that HGBL and SF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HGBL
1D Price
Change %
HGBL100%
-0.52%
SF - HGBL
26%
Poorly correlated
-1.47%
LPLA - HGBL
25%
Poorly correlated
-1.32%
MC - HGBL
25%
Poorly correlated
-3.05%
MS - HGBL
24%
Poorly correlated
-2.61%
CLSK - HGBL
23%
Poorly correlated
-2.01%
More

MC and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MC has been closely correlated with EVR. These tickers have moved in lockstep 89% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if MC jumps, then EVR could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MC
1D Price
Change %
MC100%
-3.05%
EVR - MC
89%
Closely correlated
-1.82%
PIPR - MC
89%
Closely correlated
-1.74%
LAZ - MC
85%
Closely correlated
-2.37%
PJT - MC
84%
Closely correlated
-2.08%
SF - MC
84%
Closely correlated
-1.47%
More