LBTSF vs MKGAF
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 LBTSF is a Hold and MKGAF 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).
LBTSF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMKGAF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- LBTSF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- MKGAF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
LBTSF (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MKGAF (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) price change was -5.44% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pharmaceuticals: Other industry was +56.20%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -6.16%, and the average quarterly price growth was -6.95%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pharmaceuticals: Other (+56.20% weekly)Pharmaceuticals (Other) comprise companies that are involved in the discovery, development or manufacturing of therapeutic and preventative medicines. They often collaborate with or acquire other pharmaceutical/healthcare firms. Examples of companies in this segment include Bausch Health Companies Inc., Icon Plc and Perrigo Company Plc.
| LBTSF | MKGAF | LBTSF / MKGAF | |
| Capitalization | 2.01B | 76.6B | 3% |
| EBITDA | 150M | 6.45B | 2% |
| Gain YTD | 4.505 | -5.590 | -81% |
| P/E Ratio | 49.75 | 20.96 | 237% |
| Revenue | 893M | 22.3B | 4% |
| Total Cash | 447M | 1.72B | 26% |
| Total Debt | 398M | 10.6B | 4% |
LBTSF | MKGAF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 42 | 67 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 21 Undervalued | 27 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 66 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 90 | 62 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 55 | 76 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 84 | 63 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
LBTSF's Valuation (21) in the null industry is in the same range as MKGAF (27). This means that LBTSF’s stock grew similarly to MKGAF’s over the last 12 months.
MKGAF's Profit vs Risk Rating (66) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LBTSF (100). This means that MKGAF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LBTSF’s over the last 12 months.
MKGAF's SMR Rating (62) in the null industry is in the same range as LBTSF (90). This means that MKGAF’s stock grew similarly to LBTSF’s over the last 12 months.
LBTSF's Price Growth Rating (55) in the null industry is in the same range as MKGAF (76). This means that LBTSF’s stock grew similarly to MKGAF’s over the last 12 months.
MKGAF's P/E Growth Rating (63) in the null industry is in the same range as LBTSF (84). This means that MKGAF’s stock grew similarly to LBTSF’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
LBTSF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LBTSF and IPSEY have been poorly correlated (+16% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LBTSF and IPSEY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LBTSF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LBTSF | 100% | N/A | ||
| IPSEY - LBTSF | 16% Poorly correlated | +1.77% | ||
| MEDXF - LBTSF | 10% Poorly correlated | -0.69% | ||
| LVRLF - LBTSF | 3% Poorly correlated | +14.29% | ||
| MKGAF - LBTSF | 3% Poorly correlated | -2.78% | ||
| KSPHF - LBTSF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
MKGAF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MKGAF has been loosely correlated with MKKGY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 58% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MKGAF jumps, then MKKGY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MKGAF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MKGAF | 100% | -2.78% | ||
| MKKGY - MKGAF | 58% Loosely correlated | -3.99% | ||
| PHCUF - MKGAF | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| MEDXF - MKGAF | 7% Poorly correlated | -0.69% | ||
| OASMY - MKGAF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LBTSF - MKGAF | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||