RMBHF
Price
$0.02
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 14 closing price
SOMC
Price
$18.70
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 14 closing price
Ad is loading...

RMBHF vs SOMC

Header iconRMBHF vs SOMC Comparison
Open Charts RMBHF vs SOMCBanner chart's image
RMB Holdings
Price$0.02
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$12.59K
CapitalizationN/A
Southern Michigan Ban
Price$18.70
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$3.96K
CapitalizationN/A
RMBHF vs SOMC Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
RMBHF vs. SOMC commentary
Nov 15, 2024

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 RMBHF is a Hold and SOMC is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 15, 2024
Stock price -- (RMBHF: $0.02 vs. SOMC: $18.70)
Brand notoriety: RMBHF and SOMC are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: RMBHF: 100% vs. SOMC: 103%
Market capitalization -- RMBHF: $48.48M vs. SOMC: $84.27M
RMBHF [@Regional Banks] is valued at $48.48M. SOMC’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $84.27M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $5.86B.

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).

RMBHF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileSOMC’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

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

Price Growth

RMBHF (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SOMC (@Regional Banks) price change was +4.53% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +0.23%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.70%, and the average quarterly price growth was +17.76%.

Reported Earning Dates

SOMC is expected to report earnings on Oct 23, 2024.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+0.23% weekly)

Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
SOMC($84.3M) has a higher market cap than RMBHF($48.5M). SOMC YTD gains are higher at: 21.935 vs. RMBHF (0.000). RMBHF has more cash in the bank: 17M vs. SOMC (5.8M). SOMC has less debt than RMBHF: SOMC (33.7M) vs RMBHF (1.04B). RMBHF has higher revenues than SOMC: RMBHF (54M) vs SOMC (31.2M).
RMBHFSOMCRMBHF / SOMC
Capitalization48.5M84.3M58%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD0.00021.935-
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue54M31.2M173%
Total Cash17M5.8M293%
Total Debt1.04B33.7M3,080%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
SOMC: Fundamental Ratings
SOMC
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
31
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
33
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
71
SMR RATING
1..100
7
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
45
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
82
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
GME27.370.91
+3.44%
GameStop Corp
AAPL228.223.10
+1.38%
Apple
SPY593.35-3.84
-0.64%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust
BTC.X87250.430000-3333.734400
-3.68%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
TSLA311.18-19.06
-5.77%
Tesla

RMBHF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, RMBHF has been loosely correlated with NWG. These tickers have moved in lockstep 43% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if RMBHF jumps, then NWG could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RMBHF
1D Price
Change %
RMBHF100%
N/A
NWG - RMBHF
43%
Loosely correlated
N/A
HCBC - RMBHF
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
KISB - RMBHF
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BRKL - RMBHF
23%
Poorly correlated
-0.47%
HFBL - RMBHF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

SOMC and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SOMC
1D Price
Change %
SOMC100%
N/A
FCAP - SOMC
22%
Poorly correlated
-1.45%
PVBC - SOMC
22%
Poorly correlated
-1.53%
RMBHF - SOMC
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MFDB - SOMC
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FFMR - SOMC
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More