Advertisement
RCDTF vs SNPHY
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 RCDTF is a Hold and SNPHY 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).
RCDTF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSNPHY’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- RCDTF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- SNPHY’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 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.
SNPHY’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- SNPHY’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 1 bearish.
Price Growth
RCDTF (@Pharmaceuticals: Major) experienced а +16.77% price change this week, while SNPHY (@Pharmaceuticals: Major) price change was +5.96% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pharmaceuticals: Major industry was +1.36%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +10.48%, and the average quarterly price growth was +8.86%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pharmaceuticals: Major (+1.36% weekly)The Major Pharmaceuticals industry includes companies that are involved in various processes of creating drugs to treat/prevent diseases. These companies engage in research, testing and manufacturing, as well as the distribution of pharmaceuticals into markets. Johnson & Johnson, Merck & Co., Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Novartis are among the largest companies in this category.
| RCDTF | SNPHY | RCDTF / SNPHY | |
| Capitalization | 10.6B | 3.26B | 325% |
| EBITDA | 615M | 17.2B | 4% |
| Gain YTD | 17.825 | 15.909 | 112% |
| P/E Ratio | 26.11 | 15.60 | 167% |
| Revenue | 1.99B | 270B | 1% |
| Total Cash | 231M | 62.3B | 0% |
| Total Debt | 1.58B | 40.1B | 4% |
RCDTF | SNPHY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 26 Undervalued | 84 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 45 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 41 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 41 | 42 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 40 | 83 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 50 |
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.
RCDTF's Valuation (26) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SNPHY (84). This means that RCDTF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SNPHY’s over the last 12 months.
RCDTF's Profit vs Risk Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SNPHY (100). This means that RCDTF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SNPHY’s over the last 12 months.
RCDTF's SMR Rating (41) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SNPHY (100). This means that RCDTF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SNPHY’s over the last 12 months.
RCDTF's Price Growth Rating (41) in the null industry is in the same range as SNPHY (42). This means that RCDTF’s stock grew similarly to SNPHY’s over the last 12 months.
RCDTF's P/E Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SNPHY (83). This means that RCDTF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SNPHY’s over the last 12 months.
| SNPHY | |
|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | about 1 month ago 63% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | about 1 month ago 62% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | about 1 month ago 60% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | about 1 month ago 55% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | about 1 month ago 60% |
Advertisement
RCDTF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that RCDTF and RHHBF have been poorly correlated (+3% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RCDTF and RHHBF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To RCDTF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RCDTF | 100% | +16.77% | ||
| RHHBF - RCDTF | 3% Poorly correlated | -4.12% | ||
| RHHBY - RCDTF | 3% Poorly correlated | -1.50% | ||
| PTKFY - RCDTF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PTKFF - RCDTF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SNPHY - RCDTF | -0% Poorly correlated | -0.99% | ||
More | ||||
SNPHY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that SNPHY and SNPHF have been poorly correlated (+7% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SNPHY and SNPHF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To SNPHY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SNPHY | 100% | -0.99% | ||
| SNPHF - SNPHY | 7% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| RHHVF - SNPHY | 7% Poorly correlated | -0.69% | ||
| RHHBF - SNPHY | 6% Poorly correlated | -4.12% | ||
| RHHBY - SNPHY | 5% Poorly correlated | -1.50% | ||
| OTSKY - SNPHY | 4% Poorly correlated | -1.29% | ||
More | ||||