Advertisement
BCUCY vs LKFLF
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 BCUCY is a Hold and LKFLF 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).
BCUCY’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileLKFLF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- BCUCY’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- LKFLF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
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.
BCUCY’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while LKFLF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).
- BCUCY’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 6 bearish.
- LKFLF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
BCUCY (@Catalog/Specialty Distribution) experienced а -8.35% price change this week, while LKFLF (@Catalog/Specialty Distribution) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Catalog/Specialty Distribution industry was -3.13%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.30%, and the average quarterly price growth was +18.80%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Catalog/Specialty Distribution (-3.13% weekly)The catalog and specialty distribution industry includes companies that offer retail through mail-order houses, media, online social platforms, mobile apps and other channels outside of brick-and-mortar stores. Several companies in this business partner with retail companies to assist them with marketing, digital solutions, warehousing, and/or other distribution capabilities. In essence, the industry acts as a potential catalyst for retailers/brands to widen their reach among customers. Pinduoduo Inc., Qurate Retail, Inc. and Baozun are some of the major players in this business.
| BCUCY | LKFLF | BCUCY / LKFLF | |
| Capitalization | 6.72B | 1.87B | 359% |
| EBITDA | 394M | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -9.219 | 75.000 | -12% |
| P/E Ratio | 44.09 | 12.22 | 361% |
| Revenue | 1.34B | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | 244M | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 1.23B | N/A | - |
BCUCY | LKFLF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 58 | 28 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 84 Overvalued | 8 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 28 | 80 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 38 | 70 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 62 | 49 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 66 | 5 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 85 | 50 |
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.
LKFLF's Valuation (8) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for BCUCY (84). This means that LKFLF’s stock grew significantly faster than BCUCY’s over the last 12 months.
BCUCY's Profit vs Risk Rating (28) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LKFLF (80). This means that BCUCY’s stock grew somewhat faster than LKFLF’s over the last 12 months.
BCUCY's SMR Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as LKFLF (70). This means that BCUCY’s stock grew similarly to LKFLF’s over the last 12 months.
LKFLF's Price Growth Rating (49) in the null industry is in the same range as BCUCY (62). This means that LKFLF’s stock grew similarly to BCUCY’s over the last 12 months.
LKFLF's P/E Growth Rating (5) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BCUCY (66). This means that LKFLF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BCUCY’s over the last 12 months.
| BCUCY | LKFLF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 57% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 68% | 2 days ago 54% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 60% | 2 days ago 49% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 75% | 2 days ago 56% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 65% | 2 days ago 50% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 63% | 2 days ago 51% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 8 days ago 75% | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 63% | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 63% | 2 days ago 55% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 54% | 2 days ago 35% |
Advertisement
BCUCY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, BCUCY has been loosely correlated with LVMHF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 46% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if BCUCY jumps, then LVMHF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BCUCY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCUCY | 100% | +0.71% | ||
| LVMHF - BCUCY | 46% Loosely correlated | +0.04% | ||
| LVMUY - BCUCY | 45% Loosely correlated | -0.56% | ||
| HESAF - BCUCY | 44% Loosely correlated | +2.90% | ||
| HESAY - BCUCY | 43% Loosely correlated | +1.58% | ||
| PPRUY - BCUCY | 42% Loosely correlated | -4.21% | ||
More | ||||
LKFLF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LKFLF and CJEWY have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LKFLF and CJEWY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LKFLF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LKFLF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CJEWY - LKFLF | 28% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CHDRF - LKFLF | 28% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BCUCY - LKFLF | 28% Poorly correlated | +0.71% | ||
| SWGAY - LKFLF | 26% Poorly correlated | -1.05% | ||
| BBRYF - LKFLF | 24% Poorly correlated | +1.88% | ||
More | ||||