Advertisement
TBLMF vs WHGRF
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 TBLMF is a Hold and WHGRF is a Buy.
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).
TBLMF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileWHGRF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- TBLMF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- WHGRF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 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.
TBLMF’s TA Score shows that 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish while WHGRF’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).
- TBLMF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 2 bearish.
- WHGRF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
TBLMF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while WHGRF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) price change was +10.13% 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.
| TBLMF | WHGRF | TBLMF / WHGRF | |
| Capitalization | 1.53B | 6.94B | 22% |
| EBITDA | 3.93B | 2.51B | 156% |
| Gain YTD | 13.493 | 18.962 | 71% |
| P/E Ratio | 9.29 | 4.87 | 191% |
| Revenue | 36.7B | 27.3B | 134% |
| Total Cash | 658M | 1.79B | 37% |
| Total Debt | 2.79B | 4.5B | 62% |
TBLMF | WHGRF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 45 | 43 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 29 Undervalued | 5 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 41 | 80 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 93 | 64 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 40 | 42 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 32 | 92 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | n/a |
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.
WHGRF's Valuation (5) in the null industry is in the same range as TBLMF (29). This means that WHGRF’s stock grew similarly to TBLMF’s over the last 12 months.
TBLMF's Profit vs Risk Rating (41) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for WHGRF (80). This means that TBLMF’s stock grew somewhat faster than WHGRF’s over the last 12 months.
WHGRF's SMR Rating (64) in the null industry is in the same range as TBLMF (93). This means that WHGRF’s stock grew similarly to TBLMF’s over the last 12 months.
TBLMF's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as WHGRF (42). This means that TBLMF’s stock grew similarly to WHGRF’s over the last 12 months.
TBLMF's P/E Growth Rating (32) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for WHGRF (92). This means that TBLMF’s stock grew somewhat faster than WHGRF’s over the last 12 months.
| TBLMF | WHGRF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 63% | 2 days ago 52% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 68% | 2 days ago 63% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 62% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 47% | 2 days ago 56% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 49% | 2 days ago 46% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 48% | 2 days ago 42% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 64% |
Advertisement
TBLMF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, TBLMF has been loosely correlated with HNFSA. These tickers have moved in lockstep 39% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if TBLMF jumps, then HNFSA could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To TBLMF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBLMF | 100% | N/A | ||
| HNFSA - TBLMF | 39% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| INGR - TBLMF | 21% Poorly correlated | +0.35% | ||
| TSUKY - TBLMF | 10% Poorly correlated | +4.28% | ||
| UVRBF - TBLMF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| UELKY - TBLMF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
WHGRF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that WHGRF and UVRBF have been poorly correlated (+6% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that WHGRF and UVRBF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To WHGRF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WHGRF | 100% | N/A | ||
| UVRBF - WHGRF | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| WLMIF - WHGRF | 6% Poorly correlated | +8.10% | ||
| WLMIY - WHGRF | 3% Poorly correlated | -0.09% | ||
| TBLMF - WHGRF | 2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| UMEWF - WHGRF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||