BLSFY vs LIFZF
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 BLSFY is a Hold and LIFZF 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).
BLSFY’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileLIFZF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- BLSFY’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
- LIFZF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
BLSFY (@Steel) experienced а +8.72% price change this week, while LIFZF (@Steel) price change was +4.95% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Steel industry was +2.71%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -4.09%, and the average quarterly price growth was -0.96%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Steel (+2.71% weekly)The steel industry includes manufacturers of steel and steel-related products. Companies use iron ore and scrap steel to produce steel. The industry also includes companies involved in mining and marketing of steel products. Along with serving some of the domestic markets, U.S. steel output has, over the years, been used by international economies as well. Competition from imported steel has also increased over time. The industry could be susceptible to business cycles, since the element is an important input in industrial production. Some of the globally-renowned steel behemoths include Nucor Corporation, Vale, and ArcelorMittal SA.
| BLSFY | LIFZF | BLSFY / LIFZF | |
| Capitalization | 6.23B | 1.35B | 461% |
| EBITDA | 1.62B | 163M | 991% |
| Gain YTD | 23.557 | 4.371 | 539% |
| P/E Ratio | 18.84 | 10.65 | 177% |
| Revenue | 16.4B | 208M | 7,885% |
| Total Cash | N/A | 42.3M | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | N/A | - |
BLSFY | LIFZF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 19 | 23 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 10 Undervalued | 4 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 27 | 63 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 92 | 37 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 55 | 72 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 13 | 42 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 46 |
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.
LIFZF's Valuation (4) in the null industry is in the same range as BLSFY (10). This means that LIFZF’s stock grew similarly to BLSFY’s over the last 12 months.
BLSFY's Profit vs Risk Rating (27) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LIFZF (63). This means that BLSFY’s stock grew somewhat faster than LIFZF’s over the last 12 months.
LIFZF's SMR Rating (37) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BLSFY (92). This means that LIFZF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BLSFY’s over the last 12 months.
BLSFY's Price Growth Rating (55) in the null industry is in the same range as LIFZF (72). This means that BLSFY’s stock grew similarly to LIFZF’s over the last 12 months.
BLSFY's P/E Growth Rating (13) in the null industry is in the same range as LIFZF (42). This means that BLSFY’s stock grew similarly to LIFZF’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 (%) |
BLSFY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BLSFY and CLF have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BLSFY and CLF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BLSFY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLSFY | 100% | +7.11% | ||
| CLF - BLSFY | 22% Poorly correlated | +4.91% | ||
| FEEXF - BLSFY | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LIFZF - BLSFY | 22% Poorly correlated | +3.40% | ||
| NUE - BLSFY | 22% Poorly correlated | +3.00% | ||
| CMC - BLSFY | 21% Poorly correlated | +2.61% | ||
More | ||||
LIFZF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, LIFZF has been loosely correlated with MT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if LIFZF jumps, then MT could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LIFZF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LIFZF | 100% | +3.40% | ||
| MT - LIFZF | 35% Loosely correlated | +1.80% | ||
| SID - LIFZF | 33% Poorly correlated | +4.37% | ||
| TX - LIFZF | 31% Poorly correlated | +1.75% | ||
| CLF - LIFZF | 31% Poorly correlated | +4.91% | ||
| MSB - LIFZF | 29% Poorly correlated | -1.76% | ||
More | ||||