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).
CAG’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileHLF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
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.
CAG’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while HLF’s TA Score has 7 bullish TA indicator(s).
CAG (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а -1.02% price change this week, while HLF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) price change was +10.25% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food: Specialty/Candy industry was -0.89%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.47%, and the average quarterly price growth was +2.04%.
CAG is expected to report earnings on Dec 19, 2024.
HLF is expected to report earnings on Feb 25, 2025.
A specialty/candy manufacturer specializes in one or more of the following: chocolate, candies, pasta, condiments, seasonings, among other items. Hershey Company, McCormick & Company and J.M. Smucker Company are some of the major firms in this segment. Demand for this industry’s products comes from both institutions/restaurants as well as households.
CAG | HLF | CAG / HLF | |
Capitalization | 14.2B | 1B | 1,416% |
EBITDA | 1.88B | 482M | 390% |
Gain YTD | -0.658 | -44.299 | 1% |
P/E Ratio | 14.48 | 6.42 | 226% |
Revenue | 12.2B | 5.06B | 241% |
Total Cash | 61.5M | 575M | 11% |
Total Debt | 9.07B | 2.77B | 328% |
CAG | HLF | ||
---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 55 | 21 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 12 Undervalued | 69 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 67 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 81 | 7 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 61 | 53 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 11 | 25 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 85 | 50 |
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.
CAG's Valuation (12) in the Food Major Diversified industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HLF (69) in the Food Distributors industry. This means that CAG’s stock grew somewhat faster than HLF’s over the last 12 months.
CAG's Profit vs Risk Rating (67) in the Food Major Diversified industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HLF (100) in the Food Distributors industry. This means that CAG’s stock grew somewhat faster than HLF’s over the last 12 months.
HLF's SMR Rating (7) in the Food Distributors industry is significantly better than the same rating for CAG (81) in the Food Major Diversified industry. This means that HLF’s stock grew significantly faster than CAG’s over the last 12 months.
HLF's Price Growth Rating (53) in the Food Distributors industry is in the same range as CAG (61) in the Food Major Diversified industry. This means that HLF’s stock grew similarly to CAG’s over the last 12 months.
CAG's P/E Growth Rating (11) in the Food Major Diversified industry is in the same range as HLF (25) in the Food Distributors industry. This means that CAG’s stock grew similarly to HLF’s over the last 12 months.
CAG | HLF | |
---|---|---|
RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago47% | 1 day ago85% |
Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago50% | 1 day ago75% |
Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago55% | 1 day ago67% |
MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago56% | 1 day ago66% |
TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago53% | 1 day ago70% |
TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago54% | 1 day ago67% |
Advances ODDS (%) | 1 day ago51% | 1 day ago68% |
Declines ODDS (%) | 4 days ago51% | 4 days ago79% |
BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago52% | 1 day ago79% |
Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago61% | 1 day ago70% |
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CAG has been closely correlated with GIS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 73% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if CAG jumps, then GIS could also see price increases.
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, HLF has been loosely correlated with USNA. These tickers have moved in lockstep 42% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if HLF jumps, then USNA could also see price increases.
Ticker / NAME | Correlation To HLF | 1D Price Change % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
HLF | 100% | +1.07% | ||
USNA - HLF | 42% Loosely correlated | -0.40% | ||
CENTA - HLF | 29% Poorly correlated | +2.65% | ||
CENT - HLF | 27% Poorly correlated | +2.65% | ||
CAG - HLF | 26% Poorly correlated | +0.18% | ||
FRPT - HLF | 25% Poorly correlated | +2.33% | ||
More |