ACGBF vs BCSO
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 ACGBF is a Hold and BCSO is a Hold.
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).
ACGBF’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileBCSO’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).
- ACGBF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
- BCSO’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
Price Growth
ACGBF (@Major Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while BCSO (@Major Banks) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Major Banks industry was +1.91%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +72.84%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.91%.
Reported Earning Dates
ACGBF is expected to report earnings on Apr 02, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Major Banks (+1.91% weekly)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.
| ACGBF | BCSO | ACGBF / BCSO | |
| Capitalization | 174B | N/A | - |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -3.286 | 27.660 | -12% |
| P/E Ratio | 3.52 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 729B | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 2.25T | N/A | - |
ACGBF | BCSO | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 34 | 48 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 11 Undervalued | 57 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 48 | 16 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 1 | 27 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 56 | 38 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 22 | 29 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
ACGBF's Valuation (11) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BCSO (57). This means that ACGBF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BCSO’s over the last 12 months.
BCSO's Profit vs Risk Rating (16) in the null industry is in the same range as ACGBF (48). This means that BCSO’s stock grew similarly to ACGBF’s over the last 12 months.
ACGBF's SMR Rating (1) in the null industry is in the same range as BCSO (27). This means that ACGBF’s stock grew similarly to BCSO’s over the last 12 months.
BCSO's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as ACGBF (56). This means that BCSO’s stock grew similarly to ACGBF’s over the last 12 months.
ACGBF's P/E Growth Rating (22) in the null industry is in the same range as BCSO (29). This means that ACGBF’s stock grew similarly to BCSO’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| PLDR | 30.39 | 0.15 | +0.50% |
| Putnam Sustainable Leaders ETF | |||
| EAGG | 47.48 | 0.10 | +0.21% |
| iShares ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | |||
| EUDG | 33.62 | 0.02 | +0.06% |
| WisdomTree Europe Quality Div Gr ETF | |||
| PBW | 15.93 | -0.08 | -0.50% |
| Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF | |||
| REK | 17.14 | -0.11 | -0.65% |
| ProShares Short Real Estate | |||
ACGBF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that ACGBF and ABMRF have been poorly correlated (+6% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that ACGBF and ABMRF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ACGBF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACGBF | 100% | N/A | ||
| ABMRF - ACGBF | 6% Poorly correlated | +6.58% | ||
| BACHY - ACGBF | 5% Poorly correlated | +0.29% | ||
| ACGBY - ACGBF | 2% Poorly correlated | +1.03% | ||
| AGRPF - ACGBF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BCSO - ACGBF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
BCSO and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BCSO and ACGBY have been poorly correlated (+4% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BCSO and ACGBY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BCSO | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCSO | 100% | N/A | ||
| ACGBY - BCSO | 4% Poorly correlated | +1.03% | ||
| BBVXF - BCSO | 0% Poorly correlated | +5.34% | ||
| AGRPF - BCSO | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BACHF - BCSO | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BCMXY - BCSO | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||