BMCS vs CLCFF
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 BMCS is a Hold and CLCFF 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).
BMCS’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileCLCFF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- BMCS’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- CLCFF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
BMCS (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) experienced а -0.52% price change this week, while CLCFF (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) price change was -33.66% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pharmaceuticals: Other industry was -5.07%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -7.87%, and the average quarterly price growth was -11.90%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pharmaceuticals: Other (-5.07% weekly)Pharmaceuticals (Other) comprise companies that are involved in the discovery, development or manufacturing of therapeutic and preventative medicines. They often collaborate with or acquire other pharmaceutical/healthcare firms. Examples of companies in this segment include Bausch Health Companies Inc., Icon Plc and Perrigo Company Plc.
| BMCS | CLCFF | BMCS / CLCFF | |
| Capitalization | N/A | 3.96M | - |
| EBITDA | N/A | -1.34M | - |
| Gain YTD | -46.240 | 3.384 | -1,367% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | N/A | - |
| Revenue | N/A | 10.3M | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | 1.53M | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 6.45M | - |
BMCS | ||
|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 36 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 55 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/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.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
BMCS and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BMCS and PCRX have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BMCS and PCRX's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BMCS | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMCS | 100% | N/A | ||
| PCRX - BMCS | 28% Poorly correlated | +1.41% | ||
| BKUH - BMCS | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CLCFF - BMCS | 16% Poorly correlated | -7.12% | ||
| LOVFF - BMCS | 12% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| AYRWF - BMCS | 4% Poorly correlated | -1.28% | ||
More | ||||
CLCFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CLCFF and BMCS have been poorly correlated (+16% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CLCFF and BMCS's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CLCFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLCFF | 100% | -7.12% | ||
| BMCS - CLCFF | 16% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GENPF - CLCFF | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LVZPF - CLCFF | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SHIEF - CLCFF | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HYEX - CLCFF | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||