BAM
Price
$51.05
Change
+$0.77 (+1.53%)
Updated
Oct 17 closing price
CIXXF
Price
$14.41
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Oct 4 closing price
21 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

BAM vs CIXXF

Header iconBAM vs CIXXF Comparison
Open Charts BAM vs CIXXFBanner chart's image
Brookfield Asset Management
Price$51.05
Change+$0.77 (+1.53%)
Volume$1.75M
CapitalizationN/A
CI Financial
Price$14.41
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$285.45K
CapitalizationN/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
BAM vs CIXXF Comparison Chart
Loading...
BAM
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if shorted
Show more...
VS
BAM vs. CIXXF commentary
Oct 18, 2024

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 BAM is a Buy and CIXXF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Oct 18, 2024
Stock price -- (BAM: $51.05 vs. CIXXF: $15.73)
Brand notoriety: BAM and CIXXF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BAM: 172% vs. CIXXF: 23%
Market capitalization -- BAM: $16.34B vs. CIXXF: $2.32B
BAM [@Investment Managers] is valued at $16.34B. CIXXF’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $2.32B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $124.17B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $5.9B.

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).

BAM’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCIXXF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • BAM’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • CIXXF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, CIXXF is a better buy in the long-term than BAM.

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.

BAM’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • BAM’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.

Price Growth

BAM (@Investment Managers) experienced а +6.75% price change this week, while CIXXF (@Investment Managers) price change was +3.19% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -0.30%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.44%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.48%.

Reported Earning Dates

BAM is expected to report earnings on Feb 08, 2023.

CIXXF is expected to report earnings on Feb 21, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (-0.30% weekly)

Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
BAM($16.3B) has a higher market cap than CIXXF($2.32B). BAM has higher P/E ratio than CIXXF: BAM (37.12) vs CIXXF (15.72). CIXXF YTD gains are higher at: 39.609 vs. BAM (30.731). CIXXF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 673M vs. BAM (522M). CIXXF has more cash in the bank: 174M vs. BAM (9M). BAM has less debt than CIXXF: BAM (256M) vs CIXXF (4.36B). CIXXF has higher revenues than BAM: CIXXF (2.44B) vs BAM (383M).
BAMCIXXFBAM / CIXXF
Capitalization16.3B2.32B702%
EBITDA522M673M78%
Gain YTD30.73139.60978%
P/E Ratio37.1215.72236%
Revenue383M2.44B16%
Total Cash9M174M5%
Total Debt256M4.36B6%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BAM vs CIXXF: Fundamental Ratings
BAM
CIXXF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
2332
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
20
Undervalued
28
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
5190
SMR RATING
1..100
5591
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3939
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
1001
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
9550

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.

BAM's Valuation (20) in the null industry is in the same range as CIXXF (28). This means that BAM’s stock grew similarly to CIXXF’s over the last 12 months.

BAM's Profit vs Risk Rating (51) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CIXXF (90). This means that BAM’s stock grew somewhat faster than CIXXF’s over the last 12 months.

BAM's SMR Rating (55) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CIXXF (91). This means that BAM’s stock grew somewhat faster than CIXXF’s over the last 12 months.

BAM's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as CIXXF (39). This means that BAM’s stock grew similarly to CIXXF’s over the last 12 months.

CIXXF's P/E Growth Rating (1) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for BAM (100). This means that CIXXF’s stock grew significantly faster than BAM’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BAM
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
63%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
55%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
73%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
76%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
66%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
60%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
64%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 10 days ago
62%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
59%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
57%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
BAM
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if shorted
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
GME21.660.39
+1.83%
GameStop Corp
BTC.X67612.720000571.609400
+0.85%
Bitcoin cryptocurrency
TSLA221.331.76
+0.80%
Tesla
SPY582.302.52
+0.43%
SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust
AAPL231.78-2.07
-0.89%
Apple

CIXXF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CIXXF has been loosely correlated with BN. These tickers have moved in lockstep 49% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CIXXF jumps, then BN could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CIXXF
1D Price
Change %
CIXXF100%
+3.16%
BN - CIXXF
49%
Loosely correlated
+2.30%
BAM - CIXXF
49%
Loosely correlated
+3.31%
VCTR - CIXXF
47%
Loosely correlated
+1.23%
APAM - CIXXF
46%
Loosely correlated
+1.72%
CNS - CIXXF
46%
Loosely correlated
+3.02%
More