AN
Price
$181.36
Change
-$7.80 (-4.12%)
Updated
Feb 21 closing price
Capitalization
6.9B
53 days until earnings call
CDNAF
Price
$99.63
Change
-$2.76 (-2.70%)
Updated
Feb 21 closing price
Capitalization
8B
Ad is loading...

AN vs CDNAF

Header iconAN vs CDNAF Comparison
Open Charts AN vs CDNAFBanner chart's image
AutoNation
Price$181.36
Change-$7.80 (-4.12%)
Volume$502.8K
Capitalization6.9B
Canadian Tire
Price$99.63
Change-$2.76 (-2.70%)
Volume$17.16K
Capitalization8B
AN vs CDNAF Comparison Chart
Loading...
AN
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
AN vs. CDNAF commentary
Feb 23, 2025

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 AN is a Hold and CDNAF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Feb 23, 2025
Stock price -- (AN: $181.36 vs. CDNAF: $99.63)
Brand notoriety: AN and CDNAF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Specialty Stores industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: AN: 108% vs. CDNAF: 45%
Market capitalization -- AN: $6.9B vs. CDNAF: $8B
AN [@Specialty Stores] is valued at $6.9B. CDNAF’s [@Specialty Stores] market capitalization is $8B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Specialty Stores] industry ranges from $380.15B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Specialty Stores] industry is $9.05B.

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).

AN’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileCDNAF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • AN’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
  • CDNAF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, AN is a better buy in the long-term than CDNAF.

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.

AN’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • AN’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.

Price Growth

AN (@Specialty Stores) experienced а -5.88% price change this week, while CDNAF (@Specialty Stores) price change was -1.44% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Specialty Stores industry was -3.69%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.84%, and the average quarterly price growth was -5.15%.

Reported Earning Dates

AN is expected to report earnings on Apr 17, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Specialty Stores (-3.69% weekly)

The specialty stores sector includes companies dedicated to the sale of retail products focused on a single product category, such as clothing, carpet, books, or office supplies. A specialty store could face intense competition from big-box departmental chains, and therefore offering an adequate collection of the product type it specializes in is key in maintaining/growing its market.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CDNAF($8B) has a higher market cap than AN($6.9B). CDNAF has higher P/E ratio than AN: CDNAF (12.22) vs AN (7.25). AN YTD gains are higher at: 6.783 vs. CDNAF (-5.024). CDNAF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 2.22B vs. AN (1.9B). CDNAF has more cash in the bank: 489M vs. AN (60.8M). AN (8.03B) and CDNAF (8.38B) have identical debt. AN has higher revenues than CDNAF: AN (26.9B) vs CDNAF (17.7B).
ANCDNAFAN / CDNAF
Capitalization6.9B8B86%
EBITDA1.9B2.22B85%
Gain YTD6.783-5.024-135%
P/E Ratio7.2512.2259%
Revenue26.9B17.7B152%
Total Cash60.8M489M12%
Total Debt8.03B8.38B96%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
AN vs CDNAF: Fundamental Ratings
AN
CDNAF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
3350
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
94
Overvalued
9
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
9100
SMR RATING
1..100
3061
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4877
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
1198
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

CDNAF's Valuation (9) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for AN (94) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that CDNAF’s stock grew significantly faster than AN’s over the last 12 months.

AN's Profit vs Risk Rating (9) in the Specialty Stores industry is significantly better than the same rating for CDNAF (100) in the null industry. This means that AN’s stock grew significantly faster than CDNAF’s over the last 12 months.

AN's SMR Rating (30) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as CDNAF (61) in the null industry. This means that AN’s stock grew similarly to CDNAF’s over the last 12 months.

AN's Price Growth Rating (48) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as CDNAF (77) in the null industry. This means that AN’s stock grew similarly to CDNAF’s over the last 12 months.

AN's P/E Growth Rating (11) in the Specialty Stores industry is significantly better than the same rating for CDNAF (98) in the null industry. This means that AN’s stock grew significantly faster than CDNAF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
AN
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
66%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
81%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
69%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
60%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
61%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
57%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 6 days ago
74%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
63%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
82%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
73%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
AN
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
TMF42.611.54
+3.75%
Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF
VPC22.71-0.19
-0.83%
Virtus Private Credit ETF
PFM47.48-0.45
-0.94%
Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF
FLN16.99-0.19
-1.11%
First Trust Latin America AlphaDEX® ETF
QVMS26.44-1.07
-3.89%
Invesco S&P SmallCp 600 QVM Mlt-fctr ETF

CDNAF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CDNAF has been loosely correlated with PAG. These tickers have moved in lockstep 47% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CDNAF jumps, then PAG could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CDNAF
1D Price
Change %
CDNAF100%
-2.70%
PAG - CDNAF
47%
Loosely correlated
-2.58%
SAH - CDNAF
47%
Loosely correlated
-5.14%
AN - CDNAF
44%
Loosely correlated
-4.12%
KMX - CDNAF
44%
Loosely correlated
-3.49%
LAD - CDNAF
43%
Loosely correlated
-2.93%
More