CBLUF
Price
$0.31
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 13 closing price
SBMSF
Price
$0.17
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 13 closing price
Ad is loading...

CBLUF vs SBMSF

Header iconCBLUF vs SBMSF Comparison
Open Charts CBLUF vs SBMSFBanner chart's image
China Bluechemical
Price$0.31
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$500
CapitalizationN/A
Danakali
Price$0.17
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$143.54K
CapitalizationN/A
CBLUF vs SBMSF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CBLUF vs. SBMSF commentary
Nov 14, 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 CBLUF is a Hold and SBMSF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 14, 2024
Stock price -- (CBLUF: $0.31 vs. SBMSF: $0.17)
Brand notoriety: CBLUF and SBMSF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Chemicals: Agricultural industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CBLUF: 7% vs. SBMSF: 594%
Market capitalization -- CBLUF: $1.15B vs. SBMSF: $88.4M
CBLUF [@Chemicals: Agricultural] is valued at $1.15B. SBMSF’s [@Chemicals: Agricultural] market capitalization is $88.4M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Chemicals: Agricultural] industry ranges from $40.31B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Chemicals: Agricultural] industry is $4.29B.

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).

CBLUF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileSBMSF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • CBLUF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • SBMSF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, CBLUF is a better buy in the long-term than SBMSF.

Price Growth

CBLUF (@Chemicals: Agricultural) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SBMSF (@Chemicals: Agricultural) price change was +3.45% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Chemicals: Agricultural industry was +1.06%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.77%, and the average quarterly price growth was -10.25%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Chemicals: Agricultural (+1.06% weekly)

The agricultural chemicals sector includes companies that produce chemical products for the agricultural industry applications like crop protection, animal health, biotechnology and pharmaceutical-related products. Some of the largest agricultural chemicals producers include Nutrien Ltd., Corteva Inc., and FMC Corporation.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CBLUF($1.15B) has a higher market cap than SBMSF($88.4M). CBLUF YTD gains are higher at: 49.238 vs. SBMSF (-38.889). CBLUF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 3.25B vs. SBMSF (-4.81M). CBLUF has more cash in the bank: 11.2B vs. SBMSF (22.9M). CBLUF has higher revenues than SBMSF: CBLUF (13.4B) vs SBMSF (18.2K).
CBLUFSBMSFCBLUF / SBMSF
Capitalization1.15B88.4M1,304%
EBITDA3.25B-4.81M-67,544%
Gain YTD49.238-38.889-127%
P/E Ratio4.46N/A-
Revenue13.4B18.2K73,626,374%
Total Cash11.2B22.9M48,908%
Total Debt1.05BN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CBLUF vs SBMSF: Fundamental Ratings
CBLUF
SBMSF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
4182
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
3
Undervalued
54
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
76100
SMR RATING
1..100
6985
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4277
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
1738
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a24

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.

CBLUF's Valuation (3) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SBMSF (54). This means that CBLUF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SBMSF’s over the last 12 months.

CBLUF's Profit vs Risk Rating (76) in the null industry is in the same range as SBMSF (100). This means that CBLUF’s stock grew similarly to SBMSF’s over the last 12 months.

CBLUF's SMR Rating (69) in the null industry is in the same range as SBMSF (85). This means that CBLUF’s stock grew similarly to SBMSF’s over the last 12 months.

CBLUF's Price Growth Rating (42) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SBMSF (77). This means that CBLUF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SBMSF’s over the last 12 months.

CBLUF's P/E Growth Rating (17) in the null industry is in the same range as SBMSF (38). This means that CBLUF’s stock grew similarly to SBMSF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
INDP1.170.02
+2.17%
Indaptus Therapeutics
ENV62.970.05
+0.08%
ENVESTNET
PSTG49.87-0.28
-0.56%
Pure Storage
TMCI7.92-0.12
-1.49%
Treace Medical Concepts
GOSS0.82-0.03
-3.66%
Gossamer Bio

CBLUF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CBLUF and CGA have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CBLUF and CGA's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CBLUF
1D Price
Change %
CBLUF100%
N/A
CGA - CBLUF
21%
Poorly correlated
-9.90%
SBMSF - CBLUF
10%
Poorly correlated
+0.61%
NITO - CBLUF
3%
Poorly correlated
-4.24%
YARIY - CBLUF
3%
Poorly correlated
-1.83%
LVRO - CBLUF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

SBMSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SBMSF and CBLUF have been poorly correlated (+10% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SBMSF and CBLUF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SBMSF
1D Price
Change %
SBMSF100%
+0.61%
CBLUF - SBMSF
10%
Poorly correlated
N/A
YRAIF - SBMSF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
VRDR - SBMSF
2%
Poorly correlated
+10.00%
YARIY - SBMSF
1%
Poorly correlated
-1.83%
NUFMF - SBMSF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More