Ad is loading...
BCC
Price
$140.09
Change
-$0.26 (-0.19%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
99 days until earnings call
HLBZF
Price
$102.89
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Oct 22 closing price
Ad is loading...

BCC vs HLBZF

Header iconBCC vs HLBZF Comparison
Open Charts BCC vs HLBZFBanner chart's image
Boise Cascade
Price$140.09
Change-$0.26 (-0.19%)
Volume$193.71K
CapitalizationN/A
HEIDELBERG MATERIALS AG
Price$102.89
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$5
CapitalizationN/A
BCC vs HLBZF Comparison Chart
Loading...
BCC
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if shorted
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BCC vs. HLBZF commentary
Nov 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 BCC is a Sell and HLBZF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (BCC: $140.09 vs. HLBZF: $102.89)
Brand notoriety: BCC and HLBZF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Construction Materials industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BCC: 62% vs. HLBZF: 6%
Market capitalization -- BCC: $6.07B vs. HLBZF: $15.13B
BCC [@Construction Materials] is valued at $6.07B. HLBZF’s [@Construction Materials] market capitalization is $15.13B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Construction Materials] industry ranges from $59.37B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Construction Materials] industry is $8.78B.

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).

BCC’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileHLBZF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

BCC’s TA Score shows that 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • BCC’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 3 bearish.

Price Growth

BCC (@Construction Materials) experienced а -1.57% price change this week, while HLBZF (@Construction Materials) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Construction Materials industry was -1.99%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.16%, and the average quarterly price growth was +2.81%.

Reported Earning Dates

BCC is expected to report earnings on Feb 25, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Construction Materials (-1.99% weekly)

Many naturally occurring substances, such as clay, rocks, sand, and wood, even twigs and leaves have been used in construction material. Many man-made products are also in use. Vulcan Materials Co., Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. and Owens Corning Inc. are examples of construction material companies in the U.S. Performance of companies that extract or produce construction materials could at times depend on demand for residential and commercial buildings/real estate, and therefore in some cases could feel impacted by economic cycles.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
HLBZF($15.1B) has a higher market cap than BCC($6.07B). BCC has higher P/E ratio than HLBZF: BCC (12.62) vs HLBZF (8.46). HLBZF YTD gains are higher at: 28.773 vs. BCC (12.966). HLBZF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 3.77B vs. BCC (806M). HLBZF has more cash in the bank: 1.75B vs. BCC (950M). BCC has less debt than HLBZF: BCC (530M) vs HLBZF (8.71B). HLBZF has higher revenues than BCC: HLBZF (21.1B) vs BCC (6.84B).
BCCHLBZFBCC / HLBZF
Capitalization6.07B15.1B40%
EBITDA806M3.77B21%
Gain YTD12.96628.77345%
P/E Ratio12.628.46149%
Revenue6.84B21.1B32%
Total Cash950M1.75B54%
Total Debt530M8.71B6%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BCC vs HLBZF: Fundamental Ratings
BCC
HLBZF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
17
Undervalued
9
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
657
SMR RATING
1..100
4693
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4752
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
2256
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
5050

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.

HLBZF's Valuation (9) in the null industry is in the same range as BCC (17) in the Forest Products industry. This means that HLBZF’s stock grew similarly to BCC’s over the last 12 months.

BCC's Profit vs Risk Rating (6) in the Forest Products industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HLBZF (57) in the null industry. This means that BCC’s stock grew somewhat faster than HLBZF’s over the last 12 months.

BCC's SMR Rating (46) in the Forest Products industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HLBZF (93) in the null industry. This means that BCC’s stock grew somewhat faster than HLBZF’s over the last 12 months.

BCC's Price Growth Rating (47) in the Forest Products industry is in the same range as HLBZF (52) in the null industry. This means that BCC’s stock grew similarly to HLBZF’s over the last 12 months.

BCC's P/E Growth Rating (22) in the Forest Products industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HLBZF (56) in the null industry. This means that BCC’s stock grew somewhat faster than HLBZF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BCC
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
68%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
80%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
89%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
68%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
66%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 8 days ago
81%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
69%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
88%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
62%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
BCC
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if shorted
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
AABPX13.01-0.06
-0.46%
American Beacon Balanced Inv
PLARX13.00-0.09
-0.69%
Principal SmallCap Value II R5
MAVKX15.78-0.18
-1.13%
MoA Small Cap Value Fund
VIGAX204.73-4.21
-2.01%
Vanguard Growth Index Admiral
ANODX23.22-0.48
-2.03%
American Century Small Cap Growth R6

HLBZF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that HLBZF and BRKWF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that HLBZF and BRKWF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HLBZF
1D Price
Change %
HLBZF100%
N/A
BRKWF - HLBZF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HDELY - HLBZF
24%
Poorly correlated
-0.04%
VMC - HLBZF
23%
Poorly correlated
-1.20%
BCC - HLBZF
23%
Poorly correlated
-0.19%
CRH - HLBZF
21%
Poorly correlated
-1.58%
More