AMLTF vs BQST
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 AMLTF is a Hold and BQST 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).
AMLTF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileBQST’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- AMLTF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- BQST’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 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.
BQST’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- BQST’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 2 bearish.
Price Growth
AMLTF (@Financial Conglomerates) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while BQST (@Financial Conglomerates) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Financial Conglomerates industry was -0.19%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.56%, and the average quarterly price growth was +28.80%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Financial Conglomerates (-0.19% weekly)Financial conglomerates usually encompass a wide range of financial services including (not necessarily limited to) investment banking, insurance, capital raising/underwriting, trading of financial securities, investment advisory services, wealth management of high net-worth individuals, and retail banking. Think Citigroup, American Express Company, ING Group.
| AMLTF | BQST | AMLTF / BQST | |
| Capitalization | 2.54B | 22.3M | 11,386% |
| EBITDA | 1.41B | -450.28K | -314,025% |
| Gain YTD | 0.000 | 10.000 | - |
| P/E Ratio | 58.18 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 1.39B | 0 | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | 15K | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 183K | - |
AMLTF | BQST | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 25 Undervalued | 36 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 22 | 99 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 42 | 34 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 97 | 100 | |
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.
AMLTF's Valuation (25) in the null industry is in the same range as BQST (36). This means that AMLTF’s stock grew similarly to BQST’s over the last 12 months.
AMLTF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as BQST (100). This means that AMLTF’s stock grew similarly to BQST’s over the last 12 months.
AMLTF's SMR Rating (22) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for BQST (99). This means that AMLTF’s stock grew significantly faster than BQST’s over the last 12 months.
BQST's Price Growth Rating (34) in the null industry is in the same range as AMLTF (42). This means that BQST’s stock grew similarly to AMLTF’s over the last 12 months.
AMLTF's P/E Growth Rating (97) in the null industry is in the same range as BQST (100). This means that AMLTF’s stock grew similarly to BQST’s over the last 12 months.
| AMLTF | BQST | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 12 days ago 75% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | 12 days ago 64% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | 12 days ago 62% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 12 days ago 35% | 12 days ago 31% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 12 days ago 34% | 12 days ago 26% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 12 days ago 90% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
AMLTF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that AMLTF and BFACF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that AMLTF and BFACF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To AMLTF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMLTF | 100% | N/A | ||
| BFACF - AMLTF | 24% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| AASP - AMLTF | 2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BQST - AMLTF | 0% Poorly correlated | +4.76% | ||
| ACBD - AMLTF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ABVN - AMLTF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||