AOCIF
Price
$11.25
Change
-$0.01 (-0.09%)
Updated
Apr 2 closing price
Capitalization
462.54M
CDNAF
Price
$105.30
Change
+$0.27 (+0.26%)
Updated
Apr 3 closing price
Capitalization
8B
Ad is loading...

AOCIF vs CDNAF

Header iconAOCIF vs CDNAF Comparison
Open Charts AOCIF vs CDNAFBanner chart's image
Autocanada
Price$11.25
Change-$0.01 (-0.09%)
Volume$3.9K
Capitalization462.54M
Canadian Tire
Price$105.30
Change+$0.27 (+0.26%)
Volume$7.31K
Capitalization8B
AOCIF vs CDNAF Comparison Chart
Loading...
CDNAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
AOCIF vs. CDNAF commentary
Apr 04, 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 AOCIF is a Hold and CDNAF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Apr 04, 2025
Stock price -- (AOCIF: $11.25 vs. CDNAF: $105.30)
Brand notoriety: AOCIF and CDNAF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Specialty Stores industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: AOCIF: 627% vs. CDNAF: 225%
Market capitalization -- AOCIF: $462.54M vs. CDNAF: $8B
AOCIF [@Specialty Stores] is valued at $462.54M. 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 $9.03B.

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).

AOCIF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileCDNAF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • AOCIF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • CDNAF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, CDNAF is a better buy in the long-term than AOCIF.

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.

CDNAF’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • CDNAF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.

Price Growth

AOCIF (@Specialty Stores) experienced а -0.88% price change this week, while CDNAF (@Specialty Stores) price change was +0.98% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Specialty Stores industry was -4.46%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -4.54%, and the average quarterly price growth was -13.14%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Specialty Stores (-4.46% 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 AOCIF($463M). CDNAF (12.22) and AOCIF (11.74) have similar P/E ratio . CDNAF YTD gains are higher at: 0.381 vs. AOCIF (-5.223). CDNAF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 2.22B vs. AOCIF (217M). CDNAF has more cash in the bank: 489M vs. AOCIF (103M). AOCIF has less debt than CDNAF: AOCIF (2.24B) vs CDNAF (8.38B). CDNAF has higher revenues than AOCIF: CDNAF (17.7B) vs AOCIF (6.44B).
AOCIFCDNAFAOCIF / CDNAF
Capitalization463M8B6%
EBITDA217M2.22B10%
Gain YTD-5.2230.381-1,370%
P/E Ratio11.7412.2296%
Revenue6.44B17.7B36%
Total Cash103M489M21%
Total Debt2.24B8.38B27%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
AOCIF vs CDNAF: Fundamental Ratings
AOCIF
CDNAF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8294
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
53
Fair valued
11
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
9676
SMR RATING
1..100
9355
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
7650
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
5298
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a50

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 (11) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AOCIF (53). This means that CDNAF’s stock grew somewhat faster than AOCIF’s over the last 12 months.

CDNAF's Profit vs Risk Rating (76) in the null industry is in the same range as AOCIF (96). This means that CDNAF’s stock grew similarly to AOCIF’s over the last 12 months.

CDNAF's SMR Rating (55) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AOCIF (93). This means that CDNAF’s stock grew somewhat faster than AOCIF’s over the last 12 months.

CDNAF's Price Growth Rating (50) in the null industry is in the same range as AOCIF (76). This means that CDNAF’s stock grew similarly to AOCIF’s over the last 12 months.

AOCIF's P/E Growth Rating (52) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CDNAF (98). This means that AOCIF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CDNAF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CDNAF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
57%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
57%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
63%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
59%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
58%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
60%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
58%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
58%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
59%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
59%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CDNAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
MONTX28.18N/A
N/A
Monetta
VWIGX32.65N/A
N/A
Vanguard International Growth Inv
IIMOX5.53N/A
N/A
Voya MidCap Opportunities Port I
NDVRX15.92N/A
N/A
MFS New Discovery Value R1
ABIZX21.80N/A
N/A
AMG River Road Mid Cap Value Z

AOCIF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that AOCIF and BWTL have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that AOCIF and BWTL's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To AOCIF
1D Price
Change %
AOCIF100%
N/A
BWTL - AOCIF
32%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LEFUF - AOCIF
29%
Poorly correlated
-0.37%
HPCRF - AOCIF
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CDNAF - AOCIF
17%
Poorly correlated
+0.26%
VRM - AOCIF
14%
Poorly correlated
-3.70%
More

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%
+0.26%
PAG - CDNAF
47%
Loosely correlated
-5.61%
SAH - CDNAF
47%
Loosely correlated
-6.21%
AN - CDNAF
44%
Loosely correlated
-4.81%
KMX - CDNAF
44%
Loosely correlated
-7.62%
LAD - CDNAF
43%
Loosely correlated
-7.77%
More