BRSGF
Price
$0.50
Change
-$0.01 (-1.96%)
Updated
Dec 17 closing price
OWL
Price
$23.55
Change
+$0.45 (+1.95%)
Updated
Dec 20, 04:11 PM (EDT)
54 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

BRSGF vs OWL

Header iconBRSGF vs OWL Comparison
Open Charts BRSGF vs OWLBanner chart's image
Queens Rd Cap Invt
Price$0.50
Change-$0.01 (-1.96%)
Volume$393
CapitalizationN/A
Blue Owl Capital
Price$23.55
Change+$0.45 (+1.95%)
Volume$3.76K
CapitalizationN/A
BRSGF vs OWL Comparison Chart
Loading...
BRSGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
OWL
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
BRSGF vs. OWL commentary
Dec 20, 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 BRSGF is a Hold and OWL is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 20, 2024
Stock price -- (BRSGF: $0.50 vs. OWL: $23.10)
Brand notoriety: BRSGF and OWL are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: BRSGF: 28% vs. OWL: 86%
Market capitalization -- BRSGF: $224.46M vs. OWL: $8.65B
BRSGF [@Investment Managers] is valued at $224.46M. OWL’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $8.65B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $124.17B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $5.91B.

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).

BRSGF’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileOWL’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

BRSGF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while OWL’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • BRSGF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • OWL’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both BRSGF and OWL are a good buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

BRSGF (@Investment Managers) experienced а -2.54% price change this week, while OWL (@Investment Managers) price change was -5.91% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -2.33%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.59%, and the average quarterly price growth was +7.21%.

Reported Earning Dates

OWL is expected to report earnings on Feb 12, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (-2.33% weekly)

Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
OWL($8.65B) has a higher market cap than BRSGF($224M). OWL has higher P/E ratio than BRSGF: OWL (185.70) vs BRSGF (3.33). OWL YTD gains are higher at: 60.651 vs. BRSGF (-9.455). OWL has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 633M vs. BRSGF (-30.08M). OWL has more cash in the bank: 104M vs. BRSGF (12.9M). BRSGF has less debt than OWL: BRSGF (367K) vs OWL (2B). OWL has higher revenues than BRSGF: OWL (1.73B) vs BRSGF (-26.62M).
BRSGFOWLBRSGF / OWL
Capitalization224M8.65B3%
EBITDA-30.08M633M-5%
Gain YTD-9.45560.651-16%
P/E Ratio3.33185.702%
Revenue-26.62M1.73B-2%
Total Cash12.9M104M12%
Total Debt367K2B0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
BRSGF: Fundamental Ratings
BRSGF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
98
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
21
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
64
SMR RATING
1..100
22
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
74
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
24
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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
BRSGFOWL
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
52%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
66%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
49%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
70%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
42%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
66%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
43%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
71%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
43%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
64%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
40%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 10 days ago
78%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
65%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
46%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
78%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
BRSGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
OWL
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
NFLY18.530.38
+2.09%
YieldMax NFLX Option Income Strategy ETF
TCHP42.310.13
+0.31%
T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF
HYG78.09-0.08
-0.10%
iShares iBoxx $ High Yield Corp Bd ETF
IBTO23.59-0.11
-0.45%
iShares iBonds Dec 2033 Term Trsy ETF
SEPT30.49-0.55
-1.79%
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cp Buffer10 Sep ETF

BRSGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that BRSGF and OWL have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BRSGF and OWL's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To BRSGF
1D Price
Change %
BRSGF100%
N/A
OWL - BRSGF
23%
Poorly correlated
+1.14%
SII - BRSGF
8%
Poorly correlated
+1.63%
AMDUF - BRSGF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BMNM - BRSGF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
AJMPF - BRSGF
1%
Poorly correlated
-26.32%
More

OWL and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, OWL has been closely correlated with ARES. These tickers have moved in lockstep 68% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if OWL jumps, then ARES could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To OWL
1D Price
Change %
OWL100%
+1.14%
ARES - OWL
68%
Closely correlated
+1.10%
APO - OWL
65%
Loosely correlated
+1.31%
TPG - OWL
65%
Loosely correlated
+1.15%
KKR - OWL
63%
Loosely correlated
+0.40%
CG - OWL
60%
Loosely correlated
+0.12%
More