ANPDF vs BSFFF
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 ANPDF is a Hold and BSFFF 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).
ANPDF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileBSFFF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- ANPDF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- BSFFF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
ANPDF (@Recreational Products) experienced а -6.66% price change this week, while BSFFF (@Recreational Products) price change was +5.57% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Recreational Products industry was -5.12%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.52%, and the average quarterly price growth was +8.14%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Recreational Products (-5.12% weekly)The Leisure and Recreation Products industry includes companies offering recreational goods/services such as video games, swimming pools, golf courses, boats, outdoor spaces etc. Since these are mainly geared towards consumers, strong employment conditions and healthy incomes generally augur well for the recreational products industry. Some of the largest market caps in this space belong to video game developers (e.g. Activision Blizzard, Electronic Arts and Take-two Interactive), and toy /board game makers (like Hasbro).
| ANPDF | BSFFF | ANPDF / BSFFF | |
| Capitalization | 33.2B | 2.24B | 1,485% |
| EBITDA | 11.5B | 389M | 2,956% |
| Gain YTD | 12.193 | -10.138 | -120% |
| P/E Ratio | 29.41 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 52.5B | 795M | 6,604% |
| Total Cash | 25.5B | 43.3M | 58,891% |
| Total Debt | 19.2B | 2.22B | 865% |
ANPDF | BSFFF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 26 Undervalued | 94 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 87 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 38 | 92 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 58 | 50 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 87 | 6 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 75 |
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.
ANPDF's Valuation (26) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for BSFFF (94). This means that ANPDF’s stock grew significantly faster than BSFFF’s over the last 12 months.
ANPDF's Profit vs Risk Rating (87) in the null industry is in the same range as BSFFF (100). This means that ANPDF’s stock grew similarly to BSFFF’s over the last 12 months.
ANPDF's SMR Rating (38) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BSFFF (92). This means that ANPDF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BSFFF’s over the last 12 months.
BSFFF's Price Growth Rating (50) in the null industry is in the same range as ANPDF (58). This means that BSFFF’s stock grew similarly to ANPDF’s over the last 12 months.
BSFFF's P/E Growth Rating (6) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for ANPDF (87). This means that BSFFF’s stock grew significantly faster than ANPDF’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 % |
| BZQ | 14.77 | 0.18 | +1.24% |
| ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped | |||
| EWO | 21.20 | 0.15 | +0.71% |
| iShares MSCI Austria ETF | |||
| LSAF | 42.51 | -0.26 | -0.61% |
| LeaderSharesTM AlphaFactor® US Cr Eq ETF | |||
| HLAL | 51.65 | -0.85 | -1.62% |
| Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF | |||
| IXJ | 89.15 | -1.65 | -1.82% |
| iShares Global Healthcare ETF | |||
ANPDF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, ANPDF has been loosely correlated with ANPDY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if ANPDF jumps, then ANPDY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ANPDF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANPDF | 100% | N/A | ||
| ANPDY - ANPDF | 35% Loosely correlated | -0.59% | ||
| LNNGY - ANPDF | 33% Poorly correlated | -0.08% | ||
| NCBDF - ANPDF | 24% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| VSTO - ANPDF | 24% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GDHG - ANPDF | 21% Poorly correlated | +6.81% | ||
More | ||||
BSFFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BSFFF and THLPF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BSFFF and THLPF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BSFFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BSFFF | 100% | N/A | ||
| THLPF - BSFFF | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ANPDY - BSFFF | 9% Poorly correlated | -0.59% | ||
| ANPDF - BSFFF | 7% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GBBYF - BSFFF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CUKPF - BSFFF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||