RHCO
Price
$0.04
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Sep 5 closing price
Capitalization
13.81M
SLFPF
Price
$2.57
Change
+$0.04 (+1.58%)
Updated
Sep 5 closing price
Capitalization
4.5B
Interact to see
Advertisement

RHCO vs SLFPF

Header iconRHCO vs SLFPF Comparison
Open Charts RHCO vs SLFPFBanner chart's image
Readen Holding
Price$0.04
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$1K
Capitalization13.81M
ABERDEEN GROUP
Price$2.57
Change+$0.04 (+1.58%)
Volume$1.5K
Capitalization4.5B
RHCO vs SLFPF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
RHCO
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SLFPF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
RHCO vs. SLFPF commentary
Sep 08, 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 RHCO is a Hold and SLFPF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 08, 2025
Stock price -- (RHCO: $0.04 vs. SLFPF: $2.57)
Brand notoriety: RHCO and SLFPF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: RHCO: 6% vs. SLFPF: 52%
Market capitalization -- RHCO: $13.81M vs. SLFPF: $4.5B
RHCO [@Investment Managers] is valued at $13.81M. SLFPF’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $4.5B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $170.21B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $7.56B.

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).

RHCO’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileSLFPF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

RHCO’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SLFPF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • RHCO’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
  • SLFPF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, SLFPF is a better buy in the short-term than RHCO.

Price Growth

RHCO (@Investment Managers) experienced а +20.00% price change this week, while SLFPF (@Investment Managers) price change was -3.20% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -0.26%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.60%, and the average quarterly price growth was +44.82%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (-0.26% weekly)

Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
SLFPF($4.5B) has a higher market cap than RHCO($13.8M). RHCO YTD gains are higher at: 140.000 vs. SLFPF (45.198).
RHCOSLFPFRHCO / SLFPF
Capitalization13.8M4.5B0%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD140.00045.198310%
P/E RatioN/A10.99-
RevenueN/A1.68B-
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total DebtN/A546M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
RHCO vs SLFPF: Fundamental Ratings
RHCO
SLFPF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
86
Overvalued
8
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
99100
SMR RATING
1..100
10062
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3950
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9028
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5048

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.

SLFPF's Valuation (8) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for RHCO (86). This means that SLFPF’s stock grew significantly faster than RHCO’s over the last 12 months.

RHCO's Profit vs Risk Rating (99) in the null industry is in the same range as SLFPF (100). This means that RHCO’s stock grew similarly to SLFPF’s over the last 12 months.

SLFPF's SMR Rating (62) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for RHCO (100). This means that SLFPF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RHCO’s over the last 12 months.

RHCO's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as SLFPF (50). This means that RHCO’s stock grew similarly to SLFPF’s over the last 12 months.

SLFPF's P/E Growth Rating (28) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for RHCO (90). This means that SLFPF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RHCO’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RHCOSLFPF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
62%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
81%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
63%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
58%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
73%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
50%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
54%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
78%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
52%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 25 days ago
77%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 20 days ago
89%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
59%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
84%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
59%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
RHCO
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SLFPF
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 %
CNTHO44.900.01
+0.02%
Connecticut Light & Power Co. (The)
BDUUY31.44N/A
N/A
Bangkok Dusit Medical Services Public Co., Ltd.
PRRFY12.80N/A
N/A
Premier Foods Plc.
GASXF0.76N/A
-0.15%
NG Energy International Corp.
BDCO1.42-0.06
-4.05%
Blue Dolphin Energy Co.

RHCO and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RHCO and AJMPF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RHCO and AJMPF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RHCO
1D Price
Change %
RHCO100%
-5.42%
AJMPF - RHCO
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WHF - RHCO
21%
Poorly correlated
+0.81%
SLFPY - RHCO
15%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SLFPF - RHCO
7%
Poorly correlated
+1.78%
RAFI - RHCO
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

SLFPF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SLFPF and SLFPY have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SLFPF and SLFPY's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SLFPF
1D Price
Change %
SLFPF100%
+1.78%
SLFPY - SLFPF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HALFF - SLFPF
21%
Poorly correlated
+1.15%
BENF - SLFPF
20%
Poorly correlated
+3.76%
STJPF - SLFPF
9%
Poorly correlated
N/A
QUILF - SLFPF
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More