Advertisement
BMBLF vs SCGPY
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 BMBLF is a Hold and SCGPY 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).
BMBLF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSCGPY’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- BMBLF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- SCGPY’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.
BMBLF’s TA Score shows that 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SCGPY’s TA Score has 7 bullish TA indicator(s).
- BMBLF’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 4 bearish.
- SCGPY’s TA Score: 7 bullish, 2 bearish.
Price Growth
BMBLF (@Office Equipment/Supplies) experienced а -1.65% price change this week, while SCGPY (@Office Equipment/Supplies) price change was -1.29% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Office Equipment/Supplies industry was -0.83%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.13%, and the average quarterly price growth was +11.97%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Office Equipment/Supplies (-0.83% weekly)The industry produces equipment regularly used in offices by businesses and other organizations, and could range from items like Blank sheet paper, calendars, Label and adhesive paper, paper clips, janitorial supplies, to larger /higher cost products like computers, printers, photocopiers, office furniture and so on. Many businesses in the office supply industry have been expanding into related markets like business cards, plus printing and binding of high quality, high volume business and engineering documents. Some companies in this industry also offer shipping services, including packaging and bulk mailing. Herman Miller, Inc., Steelcase Inc. and HNI Corporation.
| BMBLF | SCGPY | BMBLF / SCGPY | |
| Capitalization | 22.1B | 3.11B | 712% |
| EBITDA | 2.12B | 346M | 612% |
| Gain YTD | 42.578 | 78.475 | 54% |
| P/E Ratio | 26.71 | 44.93 | 59% |
| Revenue | 6.64B | 4.85B | 137% |
| Total Cash | 113M | 174M | 65% |
| Total Debt | 2.64B | 957M | 276% |
BMBLF | SCGPY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 75 | 91 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 37 Fair valued | 34 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 44 | 27 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 65 | 91 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 50 | 45 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 22 | 5 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 65 | 75 |
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.
SCGPY's Valuation (34) in the null industry is in the same range as BMBLF (37). This means that SCGPY’s stock grew similarly to BMBLF’s over the last 12 months.
SCGPY's Profit vs Risk Rating (27) in the null industry is in the same range as BMBLF (44). This means that SCGPY’s stock grew similarly to BMBLF’s over the last 12 months.
BMBLF's SMR Rating (65) in the null industry is in the same range as SCGPY (91). This means that BMBLF’s stock grew similarly to SCGPY’s over the last 12 months.
SCGPY's Price Growth Rating (45) in the null industry is in the same range as BMBLF (50). This means that SCGPY’s stock grew similarly to BMBLF’s over the last 12 months.
SCGPY's P/E Growth Rating (5) in the null industry is in the same range as BMBLF (22). This means that SCGPY’s stock grew similarly to BMBLF’s over the last 12 months.
| BMBLF | SCGPY | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 37% | 2 days ago 56% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 67% | 2 days ago 50% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 48% | 2 days ago 41% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 38% | 2 days ago 46% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 45% | 2 days ago 41% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 41% | 2 days ago 35% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 9 days ago 50% | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 11 days ago 54% | 25 days ago 57% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 57% | 2 days ago 52% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 57% | 2 days ago 41% |
Advertisement
BMBLF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BMBLF and SECUF have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BMBLF and SECUF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BMBLF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMBLF | 100% | +2.37% | ||
| SECUF - BMBLF | 32% Poorly correlated | +0.77% | ||
| SCGPY - BMBLF | 29% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| EXPGF - BMBLF | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GECSF - BMBLF | 23% Poorly correlated | +9.09% | ||
| BXBLY - BMBLF | 23% Poorly correlated | -1.96% | ||
More | ||||
SCGPY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SCGPY has been loosely correlated with SECUF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 37% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if SCGPY jumps, then SECUF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To SCGPY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCGPY | 100% | N/A | ||
| SECUF - SCGPY | 37% Loosely correlated | +0.77% | ||
| BMBLF - SCGPY | 29% Poorly correlated | +2.37% | ||
| CASS - SCGPY | 28% Poorly correlated | -0.59% | ||
| GHC - SCGPY | 26% Poorly correlated | +0.44% | ||
| BRC - SCGPY | 25% Poorly correlated | -0.98% | ||
More | ||||