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).
ABMRF’s FA Score shows that 4 FA rating(s) are green whileACGBY’s FA Score has 4 green FA rating(s).
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.
ABMRF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while ACGBY’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).
ABMRF (@Major Banks) experienced а -0.74% price change this week, while ACGBY (@Major Banks) price change was -0.33% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Major Banks industry was +1.80%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.86%, and the average quarterly price growth was +30.49%.
ACGBY is expected to report earnings on Apr 02, 2025.
Major banks are among the biggest companies in the world, often times with global reach and market capitalizations in the multi-billions. Large banks often have multiple arms spanning different disciplines, from deposits, to investment banking, to wealth management and insurance. The biggest banks often have key competitive advantages over smaller players in the industry in terms of brand recognition, cost of capital, and efficiency. Think J.P. Morgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup.
ABMRF | ACGBY | ABMRF / ACGBY | |
Capitalization | 14.8B | 174B | 9% |
EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
Gain YTD | 67.501 | 34.891 | 193% |
P/E Ratio | 6.01 | 3.61 | 166% |
Revenue | 7.99B | 729B | 1% |
Total Cash | N/A | N/A | - |
Total Debt | 65.2B | N/A | - |
ABMRF | ACGBY | ||
---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 26 | 29 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 18 Undervalued | 18 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 15 | 5 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 6 | 1 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 39 | 40 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 11 | 16 | |
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.
ABMRF's Valuation (18) in the null industry is in the same range as ACGBY (18). This means that ABMRF’s stock grew similarly to ACGBY’s over the last 12 months.
ACGBY's Profit vs Risk Rating (5) in the null industry is in the same range as ABMRF (15). This means that ACGBY’s stock grew similarly to ABMRF’s over the last 12 months.
ACGBY's SMR Rating (1) in the null industry is in the same range as ABMRF (6). This means that ACGBY’s stock grew similarly to ABMRF’s over the last 12 months.
ABMRF's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as ACGBY (40). This means that ABMRF’s stock grew similarly to ACGBY’s over the last 12 months.
ABMRF's P/E Growth Rating (11) in the null industry is in the same range as ACGBY (16). This means that ABMRF’s stock grew similarly to ACGBY’s over the last 12 months.
ABMRF | ACGBY | |
---|---|---|
RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago20% | 1 day ago47% |
Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago35% | 1 day ago45% |
Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago54% | 1 day ago60% |
MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago34% | 1 day ago40% |
TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago23% | 1 day ago44% |
TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago39% | 1 day ago66% |
Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago63% |
Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | 4 days ago45% |
BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago46% | 1 day ago50% |
Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago47% | 1 day ago66% |
1 Day | |||
---|---|---|---|
ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
RZV | 109.88 | 2.03 | +1.88% |
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Value ETF | |||
DYNF | 54.56 | 0.21 | +0.39% |
iShares U.S. Equity Fac Rotation Act ETF | |||
CHI | 10.56 | 0.04 | +0.38% |
Calamos Convertible Opportunities and Income Fund | |||
MDEV | 20.48 | N/A | N/A |
First Trust Indxx Global Mdcl Dvcs ETF | |||
XHYI | 38.13 | N/A | N/A |
BondBloxx US High Yield Indstrl Sctr ETF |
A.I.dvisor tells us that ABMRF and JPM have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that ABMRF and JPM's prices will move in lockstep.
Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ABMRF | 1D Price Change % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
ABMRF | 100% | N/A | ||
JPM - ABMRF | 20% Poorly correlated | +0.55% | ||
ACGBF - ABMRF | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
BACHY - ABMRF | 3% Poorly correlated | +0.82% | ||
ACGBY - ABMRF | 3% Poorly correlated | +2.36% | ||
BACHF - ABMRF | 2% Poorly correlated | -2.11% | ||
More |
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, ACGBY has been closely correlated with IDCBY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 77% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if ACGBY jumps, then IDCBY could also see price increases.
Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ACGBY | 1D Price Change % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
ACGBY | 100% | +2.36% | ||
IDCBY - ACGBY | 77% Closely correlated | +1.51% | ||
CICHY - ACGBY | 74% Closely correlated | +1.46% | ||
BACHY - ACGBY | 69% Closely correlated | +0.82% | ||
CICHF - ACGBY | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
AAVMY - ACGBY | 21% Poorly correlated | +1.68% | ||
More |