AWCA
Price
$0.29
Change
+$0.08 (+38.10%)
Updated
Oct 3 closing price
Capitalization
80.89M
CLILF
Price
$1.88
Change
-$0.21 (-10.05%)
Updated
Sep 24 closing price
Capitalization
10.53B
Interact to see
Advertisement

AWCA vs CLILF

Header iconAWCA vs CLILF Comparison
Open Charts AWCA vs CLILFBanner chart's image
Awaysis Capital
Price$0.29
Change+$0.08 (+38.10%)
Volume$92.18K
Capitalization80.89M
Capitaland Investment
Price$1.88
Change-$0.21 (-10.05%)
Volume$2.5K
Capitalization10.53B
AWCA vs CLILF Comparison Chart in %
AWCA
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
CLILF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
AWCA vs. CLILF commentary
Oct 06, 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 AWCA is a Buy and CLILF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Oct 06, 2025
Stock price -- (AWCA: $0.29 vs. CLILF: $1.88)
Brand notoriety: AWCA and CLILF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Real Estate Development industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: AWCA: 451% vs. CLILF: 8%
Market capitalization -- AWCA: $80.89M vs. CLILF: $10.53B
AWCA [@Real Estate Development] is valued at $80.89M. CLILF’s [@Real Estate Development] market capitalization is $10.53B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Real Estate Development] industry ranges from $165.37B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Real Estate Development] industry is $4.37B.

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).

AWCA’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileCLILF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

AWCA’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CLILF’s TA Score has 1 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • AWCA’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.
  • CLILF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, AWCA is a better buy in the short-term than CLILF.

Price Growth

AWCA (@Real Estate Development) experienced а +38.10% price change this week, while CLILF (@Real Estate Development) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Real Estate Development industry was -0.61%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.29%, and the average quarterly price growth was +21.22%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Real Estate Development (-0.61% weekly)

Activities range from the renovation and re-lease of existing buildings to the purchase of raw land and the sale of developed land or parcels to others. Demand for land development business is driven by GDP growth, employment rates, interest rates, and access to/cost of capital. For individual companies in this industry, proper cost estimation and successful bidding play critical roles in their profitability. Large companies could potentially have greater access to capital, while smaller companies can specialize in a specific geographic area or market niche. CBRE Group, VICI Properties Inc and Brookfield Property Partners L.P. are some of the large companies in this industry.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CLILF($10.5B) has a higher market cap than AWCA($80.9M). AWCA YTD gains are higher at: 0.520 vs. CLILF (-3.081). CLILF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 1.25B vs. AWCA (-2.47M). CLILF has more cash in the bank: 1.36B vs. AWCA (134K). AWCA has less debt than CLILF: AWCA (8.98M) vs CLILF (8.19B). CLILF has higher revenues than AWCA: CLILF (2.49B) vs AWCA (284K).
AWCACLILFAWCA / CLILF
Capitalization80.9M10.5B1%
EBITDA-2.47M1.25B-0%
Gain YTD0.520-3.081-17%
P/E RatioN/A27.85-
Revenue284K2.49B0%
Total Cash134K1.36B0%
Total Debt8.98M8.19B0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
AWCA: Fundamental Ratings
AWCA
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
80
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
86
SMR RATING
1..100
98
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
41
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
41

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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
AWCACLILF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
63%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
78%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
61%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
51%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
67%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
42%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
63%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
37%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 10 days ago
67%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 14 days ago
85%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
71%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
AWCA
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
CLILF
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 %
SPVU55.040.49
+0.90%
Invesco S&P 500® Enhanced Value ETF
DIVD37.310.15
+0.40%
Altrius Global Dividend ETF
AOA88.560.16
+0.18%
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allc ETF
DJUL46.790.02
+0.05%
FT Vest US Equity Deep Bffr ETF Jul
VRTL54.47-1.03
-1.86%
GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF

AWCA and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that AWCA and SHMSF have been poorly correlated (+7% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that AWCA and SHMSF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To AWCA
1D Price
Change %
AWCA100%
+38.10%
SHMSF - AWCA
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
VGPBF - AWCA
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
DOUG - AWCA
2%
Poorly correlated
+2.14%
OMH - AWCA
1%
Poorly correlated
-2.26%
STHO - AWCA
1%
Poorly correlated
-0.12%
More

CLILF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CLILF and SWPFF have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CLILF and SWPFF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CLILF
1D Price
Change %
CLILF100%
N/A
SWPFF - CLILF
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SHMSF - CLILF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
OMH - CLILF
-2%
Poorly correlated
-2.26%
VGPBF - CLILF
-6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
AWCA - CLILF
-7%
Poorly correlated
+38.10%
More