LEAT
Price
$11.97
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Sep 26 closing price
Capitalization
74.42M
NCBDF
Price
$34.20
Change
+$0.15 (+0.44%)
Updated
Sep 16 closing price
Capitalization
21.3B
Interact to see
Advertisement

LEAT vs NCBDF

Header iconLEAT vs NCBDF Comparison
Open Charts LEAT vs NCBDFBanner chart's image
Leatt
Price$11.97
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$1.29K
Capitalization74.42M
Bandai Namco Holdings
Price$34.20
Change+$0.15 (+0.44%)
Volume$129
Capitalization21.3B
LEAT vs NCBDF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
LEAT
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
NCBDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
LEAT vs. NCBDF 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 LEAT is a Hold and NCBDF is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 29, 2025
Stock price -- (LEAT: $11.97 vs. NCBDF: $34.20)
Brand notoriety: LEAT and NCBDF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Recreational Products industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: LEAT: 48% vs. NCBDF: 44%
Market capitalization -- LEAT: $74.42M vs. NCBDF: $21.3B
LEAT [@Recreational Products] is valued at $74.42M. NCBDF’s [@Recreational Products] market capitalization is $21.3B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Recreational Products] industry ranges from $38.73B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Recreational Products] industry is $4.73B.

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).

LEAT’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileNCBDF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • LEAT’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • NCBDF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, NCBDF is a better buy in the long-term than LEAT.

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.

LEAT’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while NCBDF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • LEAT’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • NCBDF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, LEAT is a better buy in the short-term than NCBDF.

Price Growth

LEAT (@Recreational Products) experienced а -5.52% price change this week, while NCBDF (@Recreational Products) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Recreational Products industry was -0.99%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.01%, and the average quarterly price growth was +27.37%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Recreational Products (-0.99% weekly)

The Leisure and Recreation Products industry includes companies offering recreational goods/services such as video games, swimming pools, golf courses, boats, outdoor spaces etc. Since these are mainly geared towards consumers, strong employment conditions and healthy incomes generally augur well for the recreational products industry. Some of the largest market caps in this space belong to video game developers (e.g. Activision Blizzard, Electronic Arts and Take-two Interactive), and toy /board game makers (like Hasbro).

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NCBDF($21.3B) has a higher market cap than LEAT($74.4M). LEAT has higher P/E ratio than NCBDF: LEAT (39.90) vs NCBDF (25.71). LEAT YTD gains are higher at: 71.000 vs. NCBDF (61.321). NCBDF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 238B vs. LEAT (2.89M). NCBDF has more cash in the bank: 352B vs. LEAT (15.7M). NCBDF has higher revenues than LEAT: NCBDF (1.16T) vs LEAT (54.9M).
LEATNCBDFLEAT / NCBDF
Capitalization74.4M21.3B0%
EBITDA2.89M238B0%
Gain YTD71.00061.321116%
P/E Ratio39.9025.71155%
Revenue54.9M1.16T0%
Total Cash15.7M352B0%
Total Debt652KN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
LEAT vs NCBDF: Fundamental Ratings
LEAT
NCBDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
73
Overvalued
94
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
7943
SMR RATING
1..100
869
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4152
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3717
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
85n/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.

LEAT's Valuation (73) in the null industry is in the same range as NCBDF (94). This means that LEAT’s stock grew similarly to NCBDF’s over the last 12 months.

NCBDF's Profit vs Risk Rating (43) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LEAT (79). This means that NCBDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LEAT’s over the last 12 months.

NCBDF's SMR Rating (9) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for LEAT (86). This means that NCBDF’s stock grew significantly faster than LEAT’s over the last 12 months.

LEAT's Price Growth Rating (41) in the null industry is in the same range as NCBDF (52). This means that LEAT’s stock grew similarly to NCBDF’s over the last 12 months.

NCBDF's P/E Growth Rating (17) in the null industry is in the same range as LEAT (37). This means that NCBDF’s stock grew similarly to LEAT’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
LEATNCBDF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
62%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
40%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
63%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
50%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
72%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
33%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
82%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
30%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
75%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
35%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
72%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
27%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 20 days ago
72%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 6 days ago
75%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
66%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
25%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
61%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
19%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
LEAT
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
NCBDF
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 %
PRSEF4.95N/A
N/A
Prosafe SE (Cyprus)
PSTVY14.90N/A
N/A
Postal Svgs Bk of China Ltd.
SZGPY2.68N/A
N/A
Salzgitter AG
FIDS21.25N/A
N/A
FNB, Inc.
CMHHF1.88-0.11
-5.75%
China Merchants Port Holdings Company Limited

LEAT and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LEAT
1D Price
Change %
LEAT100%
N/A
GYYMF - LEAT
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NINOF - LEAT
17%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NINOY - LEAT
12%
Poorly correlated
+2.41%
NCBDF - LEAT
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LNNGF - LEAT
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

NCBDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that NCBDF and NCBDY have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that NCBDF and NCBDY's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To NCBDF
1D Price
Change %
NCBDF100%
N/A
NCBDY - NCBDF
32%
Poorly correlated
+3.84%
ANPDF - NCBDF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
OSW - NCBDF
22%
Poorly correlated
+0.70%
ANPDY - NCBDF
20%
Poorly correlated
-0.75%
NINOY - NCBDF
17%
Poorly correlated
+2.41%
More