AMBC vs FAF
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 AMBC is a Hold and FAF 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).
AMBC’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileFAF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- AMBC’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- FAF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 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.
AMBC’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while FAF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).
- AMBC’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
- FAF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
AMBC (@Specialty Insurance) experienced а +4.96% price change this week, while FAF (@Specialty Insurance) price change was +7.40% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Specialty Insurance industry was +4.44%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.09%, and the average quarterly price growth was +11.32%.
Reported Earning Dates
AMBC is expected to report earnings on May 12, 2025.
FAF is expected to report earnings on Apr 24, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Specialty Insurance (+4.44% weekly)Specialty insurance typically caters to niche-markets, and covers items that are special or unique and/or items that are not typically covered under other insurance policies. Restoration or purchase of a one-of-a-kind collector’s item, high-value home, recreational vehicles, sailboat or even jet skis, horses and farms, all-terrain vehicle, funerals, museums and fine art collections are some examples– one or more of which are covered by a specialty insurance provider. In some cases, a specialty insurance could also complement someone’s existing auto, home and umbrella policies. Markel Corp, for Fidelity National Financial, Inc., Assurant, Inc. and Athene Holding Ltd. are examples of specialty insurance providers.
| AMBC | FAF | AMBC / FAF | |
| Capitalization | 700M | 6.16B | 11% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -9.723 | -0.753 | 1,292% |
| P/E Ratio | 86.06 | 28.86 | 298% |
| Revenue | 266M | 6B | 4% |
| Total Cash | 2.24B | 3.66B | 61% |
| Total Debt | 3.48B | 2.19B | 158% |
AMBC | FAF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 53 | 58 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 71 Overvalued | 31 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 60 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 94 | 95 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 80 | 55 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 8 | 5 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
FAF's Valuation (31) in the Specialty Insurance industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AMBC (71). This means that FAF’s stock grew somewhat faster than AMBC’s over the last 12 months.
FAF's Profit vs Risk Rating (60) in the Specialty Insurance industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AMBC (100). This means that FAF’s stock grew somewhat faster than AMBC’s over the last 12 months.
AMBC's SMR Rating (94) in the Specialty Insurance industry is in the same range as FAF (95). This means that AMBC’s stock grew similarly to FAF’s over the last 12 months.
FAF's Price Growth Rating (55) in the Specialty Insurance industry is in the same range as AMBC (80). This means that FAF’s stock grew similarly to AMBC’s over the last 12 months.
FAF's P/E Growth Rating (5) in the Specialty Insurance industry is in the same range as AMBC (8). This means that FAF’s stock grew similarly to AMBC’s over the last 12 months.
| AMBC | FAF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 11 days ago 81% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 11 days ago 75% | 11 days ago 69% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 11 days ago 70% | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 11 days ago 73% | 11 days ago 56% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 11 days ago 75% | 11 days ago 58% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 19 days ago 65% | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 11 days ago 71% | 11 days ago 53% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 11 days ago 77% | 11 days ago 65% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 11 days ago 58% | 11 days ago 61% |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| KBA | 22.77 | 0.23 | +1.02% |
| KraneShares Bosera MSCIChinaA50CntIdETF | |||
| ANEW | 46.23 | 0.29 | +0.63% |
| ProShares MSCI Trnsfmtnl Chngs ETF | |||
| VUSE | 60.31 | 0.31 | +0.52% |
| Vident U.S. Equity Strategy ETF | |||
| BSCP | 20.70 | N/A | N/A |
| Invesco BulletShares 2025 Corp Bd ETF | |||
| USL | 39.85 | -0.12 | -0.29% |
| United States 12 Month Oil | |||
AMBC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, AMBC has been loosely correlated with NMIH. These tickers have moved in lockstep 39% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if AMBC jumps, then NMIH could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To AMBC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMBC | 100% | -0.26% | ||
| NMIH - AMBC | 39% Loosely correlated | +0.64% | ||
| FNF - AMBC | 38% Loosely correlated | +0.61% | ||
| ESNT - AMBC | 35% Loosely correlated | +0.38% | ||
| FAF - AMBC | 34% Loosely correlated | -0.26% | ||
| ACT - AMBC | 33% Poorly correlated | +0.03% | ||
More | ||||
FAF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FAF has been closely correlated with FNF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 79% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if FAF jumps, then FNF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FAF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAF | 100% | -0.26% | ||
| FNF - FAF | 79% Closely correlated | +0.61% | ||
| MTG - FAF | 57% Loosely correlated | +0.49% | ||
| RDN - FAF | 56% Loosely correlated | -0.45% | ||
| ESNT - FAF | 56% Loosely correlated | +0.38% | ||
| NMIH - FAF | 55% Loosely correlated | +0.64% | ||
More | ||||