JHIUF
Price
$17.86
Change
-$1.29 (-6.74%)
Updated
Sep 25 closing price
Capitalization
10.87B
LKSGF
Price
$0.01
Change
-$0.07 (-87.50%)
Updated
May 20 closing price
Capitalization
63.27M
Interact to see
Advertisement

JHIUF vs LKSGF

Header iconJHIUF vs LKSGF Comparison
Open Charts JHIUF vs LKSGFBanner chart's image
James Hardie Industries
Price$17.86
Change-$1.29 (-6.74%)
Volume$248
Capitalization10.87B
Luks Group Vietnam Holdings
Price$0.01
Change-$0.07 (-87.50%)
Volume$240
Capitalization63.27M
JHIUF vs LKSGF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
JHIUF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
JHIUF vs. LKSGF commentary
Sep 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 JHIUF is a Hold and LKSGF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 29, 2025
Stock price -- (JHIUF: $17.86 vs. LKSGF: $0.01)
Brand notoriety: JHIUF and LKSGF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Construction Materials industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: JHIUF: 0% vs. LKSGF: 100%
Market capitalization -- JHIUF: $10.87B vs. LKSGF: $63.27M
JHIUF [@Construction Materials] is valued at $10.87B. LKSGF’s [@Construction Materials] market capitalization is $63.27M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Construction Materials] industry ranges from $76.25B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Construction Materials] industry is $9.85B.

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).

JHIUF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileLKSGF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

JHIUF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • JHIUF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.

Price Growth

JHIUF (@Construction Materials) experienced а -6.74% price change this week, while LKSGF (@Construction Materials) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Construction Materials industry was -0.60%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.50%, and the average quarterly price growth was +17.55%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Construction Materials (-0.60% weekly)

Many naturally occurring substances, such as clay, rocks, sand, and wood, even twigs and leaves have been used in construction material. Many man-made products are also in use. Vulcan Materials Co., Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. and Owens Corning Inc. are examples of construction material companies in the U.S. Performance of companies that extract or produce construction materials could at times depend on demand for residential and commercial buildings/real estate, and therefore in some cases could feel impacted by economic cycles.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
JHIUF($10.9B) has a higher market cap than LKSGF($63.3M). JHIUF has higher P/E ratio than LKSGF: JHIUF (23.19) vs LKSGF (2.06). JHIUF YTD gains are higher at: -36.305 vs. LKSGF (-88.235).
JHIUFLKSGFJHIUF / LKSGF
Capitalization10.9B63.3M17,220%
EBITDA843MN/A-
Gain YTD-36.305-88.23541%
P/E Ratio23.192.061,125%
Revenue3.79BN/A-
Total Cash392MN/A-
Total Debt2.61BN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
JHIUF vs LKSGF: Fundamental Ratings
JHIUF
LKSGF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
15
Undervalued
1
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
5389
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
9292
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
71100
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.

LKSGF's Valuation (1) in the null industry is in the same range as JHIUF (15). This means that LKSGF’s stock grew similarly to JHIUF’s over the last 12 months.

LKSGF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as JHIUF (100). This means that LKSGF’s stock grew similarly to JHIUF’s over the last 12 months.

JHIUF's SMR Rating (53) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LKSGF (89). This means that JHIUF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LKSGF’s over the last 12 months.

JHIUF's Price Growth Rating (92) in the null industry is in the same range as LKSGF (92). This means that JHIUF’s stock grew similarly to LKSGF’s over the last 12 months.

JHIUF's P/E Growth Rating (71) in the null industry is in the same range as LKSGF (100). This means that JHIUF’s stock grew similarly to LKSGF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
JHIUFLKSGF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
14%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
31%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
39%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
33%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
32%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
19%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
33%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
17%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
45%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
26%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
JHIUF
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 %
OVCHY25.120.06
+0.24%
Overseas Chinese Banking Corp., Ltd.
ROYTL0.27N/A
N/A
Pacific Coast Oil Trust
GZPZF147.38N/A
N/A
Gaztransport Technigaz
HKBNF0.40N/A
N/A
HKBN Ltd
SMAGF0.91N/A
-0.38%
Soma Gold Corp.

JHIUF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that JHIUF and FRCEF have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that JHIUF and FRCEF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To JHIUF
1D Price
Change %
JHIUF100%
N/A
FRCEF - JHIUF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
THYCF - JHIUF
18%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MCEM - JHIUF
8%
Poorly correlated
+1.15%
THYCY - JHIUF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SMID - JHIUF
1%
Poorly correlated
-0.53%
More

LKSGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that LKSGF and SMID have been poorly correlated (+2% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LKSGF and SMID's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LKSGF
1D Price
Change %
LKSGF100%
N/A
SMID - LKSGF
2%
Poorly correlated
-0.53%
IBJHF - LKSGF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PSGTY - LKSGF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IMYSF - LKSGF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JHIUF - LKSGF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More