BLVDF
Price
$0.07
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Oct 9 closing price
CFNCF
Price
$146.65
Change
+$12.65 (+9.44%)
Updated
Apr 12 closing price
Ad is loading...

BLVDF vs CFNCF

Header iconBLVDF vs CFNCF Comparison
Open Charts BLVDF vs CFNCFBanner chart's image
GlobalBlock Digital Asset Trading
Price$0.07
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$499
CapitalizationN/A
Cie Financiere Tradition Lausanne ACT
Price$146.65
Change+$12.65 (+9.44%)
Volume$200
CapitalizationN/A
BLVDF vs CFNCF Comparison Chart
Loading...
BLVDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BLVDF vs. CFNCF commentary
Dec 19, 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 BLVDF is a Hold and CFNCF is a Buy.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (BLVDF: $0.07 vs. CFNCF: $146.65)
Brand notoriety: BLVDF and CFNCF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Banks/Brokers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BLVDF: 100% vs. CFNCF: 100%
Market capitalization -- BLVDF: $15.14M vs. CFNCF: $1.03B
BLVDF [@Investment Banks/Brokers] is valued at $15.14M. CFNCF’s [@Investment Banks/Brokers] market capitalization is $1.03B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Banks/Brokers] industry ranges from $928.5B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Banks/Brokers] industry is $11.6B.

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).

BLVDF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCFNCF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

BLVDF’s TA Score shows that 0 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • BLVDF’s TA Score: 0 bullish, 1 bearish.

Price Growth

BLVDF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while CFNCF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was -3.69%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.51%, and the average quarterly price growth was +27.60%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Banks/Brokers (-3.69% weekly)

These banks specialize in underwriting (helping companies with debt financing or equity issuances), IPOs, facilitating mergers and other corporate reorganizations and acting as a broker or financial advisor for institutions. They might also trade securities on their own accounts. Investment banks potentially thrive on expanding its network of clients, since that could help them increase profits. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and CME Group Inc are some of the largest investment banking companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CFNCF($1.03B) has a higher market cap than BLVDF($15.1M). BLVDF has higher P/E ratio than CFNCF: BLVDF (16.78) vs CFNCF (10.01). BLVDF YTD gains are higher at: 20.000 vs. CFNCF (9.440). CFNCF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 157M vs. BLVDF (-468.67K). CFNCF has higher revenues than BLVDF: CFNCF (947M) vs BLVDF (0).
BLVDFCFNCFBLVDF / CFNCF
Capitalization15.1M1.03B1%
EBITDA-468.67K157M-0%
Gain YTD20.0009.440212%
P/E Ratio16.7810.01168%
Revenue0947M-
Total Cash112KN/A-
Total DebtN/AN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BLVDF vs CFNCF: Fundamental Ratings
BLVDF
CFNCF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
3048
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
67
Overvalued
23
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10014
SMR RATING
1..100
9638
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
6154
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
2345
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/a

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.

CFNCF's Valuation (23) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BLVDF (67). This means that CFNCF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BLVDF’s over the last 12 months.

CFNCF's Profit vs Risk Rating (14) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for BLVDF (100). This means that CFNCF’s stock grew significantly faster than BLVDF’s over the last 12 months.

CFNCF's SMR Rating (38) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BLVDF (96). This means that CFNCF’s stock grew somewhat faster than BLVDF’s over the last 12 months.

CFNCF's Price Growth Rating (54) in the null industry is in the same range as BLVDF (61). This means that CFNCF’s stock grew similarly to BLVDF’s over the last 12 months.

BLVDF's P/E Growth Rating (23) in the null industry is in the same range as CFNCF (45). This means that BLVDF’s stock grew similarly to CFNCF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BLVDFCFNCF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
30%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
27%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
32%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
29%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
64%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
BLVDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
FOREX / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
USDJPY154.09N/A
N/A
United States Dollar - Japan Yen
HKDEUR0.12N/A
N/A
Hong Kong Dollar - Euro
HWMAX54.37-0.42
-0.77%
Hotchkis & Wiley Mid-Cap Value A
JVSIX16.53-0.23
-1.37%
Janus Henderson Small-Mid Cap Value I
LMCHX34.54-3.37
-8.90%
Lord Abbett Mid Cap Stock R6

BLVDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that BLVDF and MS have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BLVDF and MS's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BLVDF
1D Price
Change %
BLVDF100%
N/A
MS - BLVDF
24%
Poorly correlated
-1.00%
HEXEY - BLVDF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JEF - BLVDF
21%
Poorly correlated
-3.13%
BRPHF - BLVDF
6%
Poorly correlated
-3.36%
BBKCF - BLVDF
4%
Poorly correlated
-0.26%
More

CFNCF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CFNCF and CMSQF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CFNCF and CMSQF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CFNCF
1D Price
Change %
CFNCF100%
N/A
CMSQF - CFNCF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CIIHF - CFNCF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CESTY - CFNCF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CIIHY - CFNCF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BLVDF - CFNCF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More