MNNGF
Price
$0.08
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jun 18 closing price
Capitalization
50.45M
PNDZF
Price
$138.50
Change
-$30.60 (-18.10%)
Updated
Aug 25 closing price
Capitalization
10.04B
Interact to see
Advertisement

MNNGF vs PNDZF

Header iconMNNGF vs PNDZF Comparison
Open Charts MNNGF vs PNDZFBanner chart's image
Affluent Partners Holdings
Price$0.08
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$917
Capitalization50.45M
Pandora A/S
Price$138.50
Change-$30.60 (-18.10%)
Volume$311
Capitalization10.04B
MNNGF vs PNDZF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
PNDZF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
MNNGF vs. PNDZF commentary
Sep 06, 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 MNNGF is a Hold and PNDZF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 06, 2025
Stock price -- (MNNGF: $0.08 vs. PNDZF: $138.50)
Brand notoriety: MNNGF and PNDZF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Catalog/Specialty Distribution industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: MNNGF: 100% vs. PNDZF: 228%
Market capitalization -- MNNGF: $50.45M vs. PNDZF: $10.04B
MNNGF [@Catalog/Specialty Distribution] is valued at $50.45M. PNDZF’s [@Catalog/Specialty Distribution] market capitalization is $10.04B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Catalog/Specialty Distribution] industry ranges from $301.01B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Catalog/Specialty Distribution] industry is $39.24B.

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).

MNNGF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whilePNDZF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • MNNGF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • PNDZF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, PNDZF is a better buy in the long-term than MNNGF.

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.

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

  • PNDZF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.

Price Growth

MNNGF (@Catalog/Specialty Distribution) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while PNDZF (@Catalog/Specialty Distribution) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Catalog/Specialty Distribution industry was +1.14%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +9.20%, and the average quarterly price growth was +5.41%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Catalog/Specialty Distribution (+1.14% weekly)

The catalog and specialty distribution industry includes companies that offer retail through mail-order houses, media, online social platforms, mobile apps and other channels outside of brick-and-mortar stores. Several companies in this business partner with retail companies to assist them with marketing, digital solutions, warehousing, and/or other distribution capabilities. In essence, the industry acts as a potential catalyst for retailers/brands to widen their reach among customers. Pinduoduo Inc., Qurate Retail, Inc. and Baozun are some of the major players in this business.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
PNDZF($10B) has a higher market cap than MNNGF($50.5M). MNNGF YTD gains are higher at: 60.000 vs. PNDZF (-22.007).
MNNGFPNDZFMNNGF / PNDZF
Capitalization50.5M10B1%
EBITDAN/A10.3B-
Gain YTD60.000-22.007-273%
P/E RatioN/A13.14-
RevenueN/A32.5B-
Total CashN/A817M-
Total DebtN/A16.1B-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
MNNGF vs PNDZF: Fundamental Ratings
MNNGF
PNDZF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
3496
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
86
Overvalued
63
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
5553
SMR RATING
1..100
9812
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5085
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
10086
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.

PNDZF's Valuation (63) in the null industry is in the same range as MNNGF (86). This means that PNDZF’s stock grew similarly to MNNGF’s over the last 12 months.

PNDZF's Profit vs Risk Rating (53) in the null industry is in the same range as MNNGF (55). This means that PNDZF’s stock grew similarly to MNNGF’s over the last 12 months.

PNDZF's SMR Rating (12) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for MNNGF (98). This means that PNDZF’s stock grew significantly faster than MNNGF’s over the last 12 months.

MNNGF's Price Growth Rating (50) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for PNDZF (85). This means that MNNGF’s stock grew somewhat faster than PNDZF’s over the last 12 months.

PNDZF's P/E Growth Rating (86) in the null industry is in the same range as MNNGF (100). This means that PNDZF’s stock grew similarly to MNNGF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
MNNGFPNDZF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
50%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
39%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
34%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
27%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
26%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
46%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
25%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
44%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
32%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
PNDZF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
IUSV98.970.75
+0.76%
iShares Core S&P US Value ETF
EWUS39.770.29
+0.72%
iShares MSCI United Kingdom Small-Cp ETF
CCNR28.830.04
+0.15%
ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF
DIVZ35.780.04
+0.11%
Opal Dividend Income ETF
ACP5.89N/A
N/A
abrdn Income Credit Strategies Fund

MNNGF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MNNGF
1D Price
Change %
MNNGF100%
N/A
REAL - MNNGF
32%
Poorly correlated
+4.83%
LVMHF - MNNGF
1%
Poorly correlated
-3.97%
DCOHF - MNNGF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PNDZF - MNNGF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LKFLF - MNNGF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

PNDZF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that PNDZF and MENEF have been poorly correlated (+4% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PNDZF and MENEF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To PNDZF
1D Price
Change %
PNDZF100%
N/A
MENEF - PNDZF
4%
Poorly correlated
-10.92%
HESAF - PNDZF
3%
Poorly correlated
-2.79%
LVMUY - PNDZF
0%
Poorly correlated
-4.21%
MNNGF - PNDZF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LVMHF - PNDZF
-0%
Poorly correlated
-3.97%
More