ANZFF vs CHEAF
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 ANZFF is a Hold and CHEAF 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).
ANZFF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileCHEAF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- ANZFF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- CHEAF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
ANZFF (@Airlines) experienced а -3.65% price change this week, while CHEAF (@Airlines) price change was +1.02% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Airlines industry was -0.31%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +9.80%, and the average quarterly price growth was -5.41%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Airlines (-0.31% weekly)Airlines industry comprises passenger air transportation, including scheduled and non-scheduled routes. This can include charter airlines, as well as regular commuter ones. Discount pricing and the rise of low-cost carriers over recent decades have expanded the industry by making its services accessible to a much larger global population, compared to the older days when airline travel was a relative luxury for many people in the world. Delta Air Lines Inc., Southwest Airlines Co and United Continental Holdings, Inc. are some of the airlines with the largest stock market capitalizations in the U.S.
| ANZFF | CHEAF | ANZFF / CHEAF | |
| Capitalization | 2.26B | 11.7B | 19% |
| EBITDA | 1.12B | 25.1B | 4% |
| Gain YTD | -19.671 | -5.362 | 367% |
| P/E Ratio | 12.81 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 6.75B | 128B | 5% |
| Total Cash | 1.28B | 3.94B | 33% |
| Total Debt | 2.82B | 180B | 2% |
ANZFF | CHEAF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 86 | 95 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 13 Undervalued | 88 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 89 | 94 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 60 | 51 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 9 | 95 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 75 | 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.
ANZFF's Valuation (13) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CHEAF (88). This means that ANZFF’s stock grew significantly faster than CHEAF’s over the last 12 months.
ANZFF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as CHEAF (100). This means that ANZFF’s stock grew similarly to CHEAF’s over the last 12 months.
ANZFF's SMR Rating (89) in the null industry is in the same range as CHEAF (94). This means that ANZFF’s stock grew similarly to CHEAF’s over the last 12 months.
CHEAF's Price Growth Rating (51) in the null industry is in the same range as ANZFF (60). This means that CHEAF’s stock grew similarly to ANZFF’s over the last 12 months.
ANZFF's P/E Growth Rating (9) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CHEAF (95). This means that ANZFF’s stock grew significantly faster than CHEAF’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 (%) |
ANZFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that ANZFF and CHEAF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that ANZFF and CHEAF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ANZFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANZFF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CHEAF - ANZFF | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BABWF - ANZFF | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ALNPY - ANZFF | 4% Poorly correlated | +0.64% | ||
| AGZNF - ANZFF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CEBUY - ANZFF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
CHEAF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CHEAF and ANZFF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CHEAF and ANZFF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CHEAF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHEAF | 100% | N/A | ||
| ANZFF - CHEAF | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HRBR - CHEAF | 20% Poorly correlated | -12.50% |