Advertisement
LWSCF vs RAFLF
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 LWSCF is a Hold and RAFLF 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).
LWSCF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileRAFLF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- LWSCF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- RAFLF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
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.
LWSCF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- LWSCF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
LWSCF (@Medical/Nursing Services) experienced а +0.15% price change this week, while RAFLF (@Medical/Nursing Services) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Medical/Nursing Services industry was +1.73%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.48%, and the average quarterly price growth was +8.31%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Medical/Nursing Services (+1.73% weekly)The medical/nursing services includes companies that provide medical-related services such as ambulance services, dialysis centers, respiratory therapy, blood testing and rehabilitation services. DaVita Inc., Chemed Corporation and Guardant Health, Inc. are examples of companies in this industry.
| LWSCF | RAFLF | LWSCF / RAFLF | |
| Capitalization | 632M | 1.93B | 33% |
| EBITDA | 63.9M | 239M | 27% |
| Gain YTD | 24.690 | -10.058 | -245% |
| P/E Ratio | 76.92 | 17.54 | 438% |
| Revenue | 736M | 767M | 96% |
| Total Cash | 30.4M | 253M | 12% |
| Total Debt | 999M | 96.1M | 1,040% |
LWSCF | RAFLF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 26 Undervalued | 24 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 45 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 90 | 79 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 44 | 75 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 30 | 38 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 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.
RAFLF's Valuation (24) in the null industry is in the same range as LWSCF (26). This means that RAFLF’s stock grew similarly to LWSCF’s over the last 12 months.
LWSCF's Profit vs Risk Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for RAFLF (100). This means that LWSCF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RAFLF’s over the last 12 months.
RAFLF's SMR Rating (79) in the null industry is in the same range as LWSCF (90). This means that RAFLF’s stock grew similarly to LWSCF’s over the last 12 months.
LWSCF's Price Growth Rating (44) in the null industry is in the same range as RAFLF (75). This means that LWSCF’s stock grew similarly to RAFLF’s over the last 12 months.
LWSCF's P/E Growth Rating (30) in the null industry is in the same range as RAFLF (38). This means that LWSCF’s stock grew similarly to RAFLF’s over the last 12 months.
| LWSCF | RAFLF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 41% | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 50% | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 48% | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 47% | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 54% | 4 days ago 20% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 55% | 4 days ago 20% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 59% | N/A |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| MFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| MBGFX | 20.60 | 0.19 | +0.93% |
| MassMutual Blue Chip Growth R4 | |||
| FGRIX | 68.03 | 0.33 | +0.49% |
| Fidelity Growth & Income | |||
| RAAIX | 10.39 | 0.03 | +0.33% |
| Altegris/AACA Opportunistic Real Estt I | |||
| SUVZX | 12.88 | 0.03 | +0.23% |
| PGIM Quant Solutions Large-Cap Val Z | |||
| GSXPX | 53.25 | 0.01 | +0.02% |
| Goldman Sachs Small Cp Val Insghts P | |||
LWSCF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LWSCF and MFCSF have been poorly correlated (+16% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LWSCF and MFCSF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LWSCF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LWSCF | 100% | N/A | ||
| MFCSF - LWSCF | 16% Poorly correlated | +1.88% | ||
| HLYK - LWSCF | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| NWKHY - LWSCF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ORPEF - LWSCF | -2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| RAFLF - LWSCF | -3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
RAFLF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that RAFLF and HLYK have been poorly correlated (+17% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RAFLF and HLYK's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To RAFLF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RAFLF | 100% | N/A | ||
| HLYK - RAFLF | 17% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LTGHY - RAFLF | 0% Poorly correlated | -0.32% | ||
| KJFI - RAFLF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ORPEF - RAFLF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| NWKHY - RAFLF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||