AOMFF vs CDGLY
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 AOMFF is a Hold and CDGLY 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).
AOMFF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCDGLY’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- AOMFF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- CDGLY’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
AOMFF (@Railroads) experienced а -5.11% price change this week, while CDGLY (@Railroads) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Railroads industry was +0.07%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.95%, and the average quarterly price growth was -5.15%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Railroads (+0.07% weekly)The Railroad industry includes passenger and freight transportation services along rail lines. This also includes companies that provide maintenance and switching duties as part of rail services. Within North America, the industry is largely dominated by some large operators. Several short-line railroads serve regional and local routes. Union Pacific Corporation, Canadian National Railway Company, and CSX Corporation are some of the prominent names in the business. The railroad business is relatively cyclical; economic expansion boost the freight services in particular, while economic stagnation often dampens transportation demand.
| AOMFF | CDGLY | AOMFF / CDGLY | |
| Capitalization | 9.74B | 2.21B | 441% |
| EBITDA | 902M | 690M | 131% |
| Gain YTD | -11.121 | -19.468 | 57% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | 14.07 | - |
| Revenue | 18B | 4.14B | 435% |
| Total Cash | 1.79B | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 3.56B | N/A | - |
AOMFF | CDGLY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 83 Overvalued | 28 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 97 | 87 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 46 | 64 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 3 | 68 | |
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.
CDGLY's Valuation (28) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for AOMFF (83). This means that CDGLY’s stock grew somewhat faster than AOMFF’s over the last 12 months.
CDGLY's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as AOMFF (100). This means that CDGLY’s stock grew similarly to AOMFF’s over the last 12 months.
CDGLY's SMR Rating (87) in the null industry is in the same range as AOMFF (97). This means that CDGLY’s stock grew similarly to AOMFF’s over the last 12 months.
AOMFF's Price Growth Rating (46) in the null industry is in the same range as CDGLY (64). This means that AOMFF’s stock grew similarly to CDGLY’s over the last 12 months.
AOMFF's P/E Growth Rating (3) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CDGLY (68). This means that AOMFF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CDGLY’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 (%) |
AOMFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that AOMFF and ALSMY have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that AOMFF and ALSMY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To AOMFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AOMFF | 100% | -0.72% | ||
| ALSMY - AOMFF | 32% Poorly correlated | -1.44% | ||
| CRYCY - AOMFF | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CDGLY - AOMFF | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| EJPRF - AOMFF | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CJPRY - AOMFF | 3% Poorly correlated | -0.21% | ||
More | ||||
CDGLY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CDGLY and AOMFF have been poorly correlated (+9% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CDGLY and AOMFF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CDGLY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CDGLY | 100% | N/A | ||
| AOMFF - CDGLY | 9% Poorly correlated | -0.72% | ||
| EJPRF - CDGLY | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CRYCY - CDGLY | -2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CJPRY - CDGLY | -2% Poorly correlated | -0.21% | ||
| USDP - CDGLY | -3% Poorly correlated | -26.32% | ||
More | ||||