BVFL vs SCZC
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 BVFL is a Hold and SCZC 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).
BVFL’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSCZC’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).
- BVFL’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- SCZC’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 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.
BVFL’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SCZC’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).
- BVFL’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 5 bearish.
- SCZC’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
BVFL (@Regional Banks) experienced а -1.53% price change this week, while SCZC (@Regional Banks) price change was +0.55% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -2.30%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.53%, and the average quarterly price growth was +20.55%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (-2.30% weekly)Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.
| BVFL | SCZC | BVFL / SCZC | |
| Capitalization | 118M | 221M | 53% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 22.708 | 42.237 | 54% |
| P/E Ratio | 7.07 | 6.49 | 109% |
| Revenue | 37.8M | 80.3M | 47% |
| Total Cash | 3.15M | 37M | 9% |
| Total Debt | 37.3M | 0 | - |
BVFL | SCZC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 19 | 82 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 77 Overvalued | 88 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 89 | 15 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 59 | 30 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 39 | 44 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 12 | 15 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 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.
BVFL's Valuation (77) in the null industry is in the same range as SCZC (88). This means that BVFL’s stock grew similarly to SCZC’s over the last 12 months.
SCZC's Profit vs Risk Rating (15) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for BVFL (89). This means that SCZC’s stock grew significantly faster than BVFL’s over the last 12 months.
SCZC's SMR Rating (30) in the null industry is in the same range as BVFL (59). This means that SCZC’s stock grew similarly to BVFL’s over the last 12 months.
BVFL's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as SCZC (44). This means that BVFL’s stock grew similarly to SCZC’s over the last 12 months.
BVFL's P/E Growth Rating (12) in the null industry is in the same range as SCZC (15). This means that BVFL’s stock grew similarly to SCZC’s over the last 12 months.
| BVFL | SCZC | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 39% | 1 day ago 23% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 31% | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 20% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 36% | 1 day ago 31% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 46% | 1 day ago 45% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 49% | 1 day ago 41% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 8 days ago 67% | 7 days ago 47% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 53% | 25 days ago 35% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 36% | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 60% | 1 day ago 24% |
BVFL and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BVFL and BCAL have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BVFL and BCAL's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BVFL | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BVFL | 100% | -2.90% | ||
| BCAL - BVFL | 32% Poorly correlated | -4.81% | ||
| FBK - BVFL | 32% Poorly correlated | -5.86% | ||
| FNWD - BVFL | 32% Poorly correlated | -3.84% | ||
| MRBK - BVFL | 32% Poorly correlated | -3.89% | ||
| OPBK - BVFL | 31% Poorly correlated | -6.80% | ||
More | ||||
SCZC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that SCZC and MBLU have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SCZC and MBLU's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To SCZC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCZC | 100% | N/A | ||
| MBLU - SCZC | 31% Poorly correlated | +0.43% | ||
| PVBK - SCZC | 26% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SASR - SCZC | 23% Poorly correlated | -5.88% | ||
| BVFL - SCZC | 22% Poorly correlated | -2.90% | ||
| STBA - SCZC | 22% Poorly correlated | -6.14% | ||
More | ||||