BYFC vs EFSC
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 BYFC is a Hold and EFSC 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).
BYFC’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileEFSC’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- BYFC’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- EFSC’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.
EFSC’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- EFSC’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
BYFC (@Regional Banks) experienced а -3.59% price change this week, while EFSC (@Regional Banks) price change was -2.66% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -1.09%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.76%, and the average quarterly price growth was +9.90%.
Reported Earning Dates
BYFC is expected to report earnings on Nov 09, 2023.
EFSC is expected to report earnings on Apr 28, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (-1.09% 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.
| BYFC | EFSC | BYFC / EFSC | |
| Capitalization | 51.1M | 1.47B | 3% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 9.635 | 5.053 | 191% |
| P/E Ratio | 10.21 | 7.73 | 132% |
| Revenue | 34.4M | 550M | 6% |
| Total Cash | 6.19M | 193M | 3% |
| Total Debt | 224M | 204M | 110% |
BYFC | EFSC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 62 | 70 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 79 Overvalued | 76 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 36 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 75 | 12 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 48 | 44 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 1 | 15 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
EFSC's Valuation (76) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as BYFC (79) in the Savings Banks industry. This means that EFSC’s stock grew similarly to BYFC’s over the last 12 months.
EFSC's Profit vs Risk Rating (36) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BYFC (100) in the Savings Banks industry. This means that EFSC’s stock grew somewhat faster than BYFC’s over the last 12 months.
EFSC's SMR Rating (12) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for BYFC (75) in the Savings Banks industry. This means that EFSC’s stock grew somewhat faster than BYFC’s over the last 12 months.
EFSC's Price Growth Rating (44) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as BYFC (48) in the Savings Banks industry. This means that EFSC’s stock grew similarly to BYFC’s over the last 12 months.
BYFC's P/E Growth Rating (1) in the Savings Banks industry is in the same range as EFSC (15) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that BYFC’s stock grew similarly to EFSC’s over the last 12 months.
| EFSC | |
|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 67% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 76% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 68% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 66% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 66% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 56% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 18 days ago 54% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 67% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 76% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 56% |
BYFC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that BYFC and FITB have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that BYFC and FITB's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To BYFC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BYFC | 100% | -2.72% | ||
| FITB - BYFC | 28% Poorly correlated | -1.67% | ||
| KEY - BYFC | 28% Poorly correlated | -3.70% | ||
| HBAN - BYFC | 27% Poorly correlated | -1.64% | ||
| COLB - BYFC | 26% Poorly correlated | -1.96% | ||
| EFSC - BYFC | 26% Poorly correlated | -2.24% | ||
More | ||||
EFSC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, EFSC has been closely correlated with NWBI. These tickers have moved in lockstep 87% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if EFSC jumps, then NWBI could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To EFSC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EFSC | 100% | -2.24% | ||
| NWBI - EFSC | 87% Closely correlated | -0.63% | ||
| PRK - EFSC | 85% Closely correlated | -2.15% | ||
| BUSE - EFSC | 85% Closely correlated | -2.65% | ||
| FMBH - EFSC | 84% Closely correlated | -1.33% | ||
| TRST - EFSC | 84% Closely correlated | -1.27% | ||
More | ||||