RSGUF
Price
$4.05
Change
-$0.11 (-2.64%)
Updated
Jun 27 closing price
Capitalization
501.75M
SAPIF
Price
$19.86
Change
-$0.09 (-0.45%)
Updated
Jun 27 closing price
Capitalization
8.86B
Interact to see
Advertisement

RSGUF vs SAPIF

Header iconRSGUF vs SAPIF Comparison
Open Charts RSGUF vs SAPIFBanner chart's image
Rogers Sugar
Price$4.05
Change-$0.11 (-2.64%)
Volume$14K
Capitalization501.75M
Saputo
Price$19.86
Change-$0.09 (-0.45%)
Volume$108.71K
Capitalization8.86B
RSGUF vs SAPIF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
RSGUF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SAPIF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
RSGUF vs. SAPIF commentary
Jun 28, 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 RSGUF is a Hold and SAPIF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jun 28, 2025
Stock price -- (RSGUF: $4.05 vs. SAPIF: $19.86)
Brand notoriety: RSGUF and SAPIF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Food: Specialty/Candy industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: RSGUF: 133% vs. SAPIF: 184%
Market capitalization -- RSGUF: $501.75M vs. SAPIF: $8.86B
RSGUF [@Food: Specialty/Candy] is valued at $501.75M. SAPIF’s [@Food: Specialty/Candy] market capitalization is $8.86B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Food: Specialty/Candy] industry ranges from $327.81B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Food: Specialty/Candy] industry is $9.42B.

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).

RSGUF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSAPIF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

RSGUF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SAPIF’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • RSGUF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • SAPIF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, RSGUF is a better buy in the short-term than SAPIF.

Price Growth

RSGUF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а -2.43% price change this week, while SAPIF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) price change was +1.43% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food: Specialty/Candy industry was -0.38%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.26%, and the average quarterly price growth was +0.17%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Food: Specialty/Candy (-0.38% weekly)

A specialty/candy manufacturer specializes in one or more of the following: chocolate, candies, pasta, condiments, seasonings, among other items. Hershey Company, McCormick & Company and J.M. Smucker Company are some of the major firms in this segment. Demand for this industry’s products comes from both institutions/restaurants as well as households.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
SAPIF($8.86B) has a higher market cap than RSGUF($502M). SAPIF has higher P/E ratio than RSGUF: SAPIF (18.90) vs RSGUF (12.55). SAPIF YTD gains are higher at: 14.401 vs. RSGUF (-0.880). SAPIF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.46B vs. RSGUF (119M). SAPIF has more cash in the bank: 263M vs. RSGUF (5.83M). RSGUF has less debt than SAPIF: RSGUF (445M) vs SAPIF (4.04B). SAPIF has higher revenues than RSGUF: SAPIF (17.8B) vs RSGUF (1.13B).
RSGUFSAPIFRSGUF / SAPIF
Capitalization502M8.86B6%
EBITDA119M1.46B8%
Gain YTD-0.88014.401-6%
P/E Ratio12.5518.9066%
Revenue1.13B17.8B6%
Total Cash5.83M263M2%
Total Debt445M4.04B11%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
RSGUF vs SAPIF: Fundamental Ratings
RSGUF
SAPIF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
2779
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
7
Undervalued
35
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
69100
SMR RATING
1..100
5591
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5149
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
6526
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a39

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.

RSGUF's Valuation (7) in the null industry is in the same range as SAPIF (35). This means that RSGUF’s stock grew similarly to SAPIF’s over the last 12 months.

RSGUF's Profit vs Risk Rating (69) in the null industry is in the same range as SAPIF (100). This means that RSGUF’s stock grew similarly to SAPIF’s over the last 12 months.

RSGUF's SMR Rating (55) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SAPIF (91). This means that RSGUF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SAPIF’s over the last 12 months.

SAPIF's Price Growth Rating (49) in the null industry is in the same range as RSGUF (51). This means that SAPIF’s stock grew similarly to RSGUF’s over the last 12 months.

SAPIF's P/E Growth Rating (26) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for RSGUF (65). This means that SAPIF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RSGUF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSGUFSAPIF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
55%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
44%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
46%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
34%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
60%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
44%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
68%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
37%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
49%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
32%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
51%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
51%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
57%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
65%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
27%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
37%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
RSGUF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SAPIF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
TGCEX32.650.28
+0.87%
TCW Concentrated Large Cap Growth I Cl
LFLTX14.170.12
+0.85%
Lord Abbett Focused Large Cap Value R5
DNMDX29.150.07
+0.24%
Dunham Monthly Distribution N
PRVIX51.550.01
+0.02%
T. Rowe Price Small-Cap Value I
AMANX69.25N/A
N/A
Amana Income Investor

RSGUF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RSGUF and LW have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RSGUF and LW's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RSGUF
1D Price
Change %
RSGUF100%
-2.55%
LW - RSGUF
23%
Poorly correlated
+0.39%
SAPIF - RSGUF
12%
Poorly correlated
-0.45%
TATYY - RSGUF
11%
Poorly correlated
+0.58%
TATYF - RSGUF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SGLJF - RSGUF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

SAPIF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SAPIF and ASBFY have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SAPIF and ASBFY's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SAPIF
1D Price
Change %
SAPIF100%
-0.45%
ASBFY - SAPIF
25%
Poorly correlated
-0.23%
MAMA - SAPIF
22%
Poorly correlated
+1.36%
RSGUF - SAPIF
12%
Poorly correlated
-2.55%
PRBZF - SAPIF
8%
Poorly correlated
-0.46%
TATYF - SAPIF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More