CBUMF vs TGLS
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 CBUMF is a Hold and TGLS 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).
CBUMF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileTGLS’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).
- CBUMF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- TGLS’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.
TGLS’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- TGLS’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
Price Growth
CBUMF (@Construction Materials) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while TGLS (@Construction Materials) price change was -8.63% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Construction Materials industry was -1.91%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.51%, and the average quarterly price growth was +6.85%.
Reported Earning Dates
TGLS is expected to report earnings on May 01, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Construction Materials (-1.91% weekly)Many naturally occurring substances, such as clay, rocks, sand, and wood, even twigs and leaves have been used in construction material. Many man-made products are also in use. Vulcan Materials Co., Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. and Owens Corning Inc. are examples of construction material companies in the U.S. Performance of companies that extract or produce construction materials could at times depend on demand for residential and commercial buildings/real estate, and therefore in some cases could feel impacted by economic cycles.
| CBUMF | TGLS | CBUMF / TGLS | |
| Capitalization | 5.3B | 2.45B | 217% |
| EBITDA | 35.6B | 292M | 12,192% |
| Gain YTD | 0.000 | -12.708 | - |
| P/E Ratio | 4.27 | 13.39 | 32% |
| Revenue | 261B | 833M | 31,333% |
| Total Cash | 44.1B | 132M | 33,409% |
| Total Debt | 188B | 170M | 110,588% |
CBUMF | TGLS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 52 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 5 Undervalued | 18 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 8 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 100 | 37 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 39 | 57 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 2 | 8 | |
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.
CBUMF's Valuation (5) in the null industry is in the same range as TGLS (18) in the Building Products industry. This means that CBUMF’s stock grew similarly to TGLS’s over the last 12 months.
TGLS's Profit vs Risk Rating (8) in the Building Products industry is significantly better than the same rating for CBUMF (100) in the null industry. This means that TGLS’s stock grew significantly faster than CBUMF’s over the last 12 months.
TGLS's SMR Rating (37) in the Building Products industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CBUMF (100) in the null industry. This means that TGLS’s stock grew somewhat faster than CBUMF’s over the last 12 months.
CBUMF's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as TGLS (57) in the Building Products industry. This means that CBUMF’s stock grew similarly to TGLS’s over the last 12 months.
CBUMF's P/E Growth Rating (2) in the null industry is in the same range as TGLS (8) in the Building Products industry. This means that CBUMF’s stock grew similarly to TGLS’s over the last 12 months.
| TGLS | |
|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 90% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 85% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 66% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 63% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 73% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 71% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 10 days ago 87% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 73% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 90% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 72% |
CBUMF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CBUMF and CBUMY have been poorly correlated (+18% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CBUMF and CBUMY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CBUMF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBUMF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CBUMY - CBUMF | 18% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CARCY - CBUMF | 16% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BZZUY - CBUMF | 6% Poorly correlated | -1.06% | ||
| SUM - CBUMF | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| TGLS - CBUMF | 4% Poorly correlated | -2.47% | ||
More | ||||
TGLS and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, TGLS has been loosely correlated with BCC. These tickers have moved in lockstep 49% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if TGLS jumps, then BCC could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To TGLS | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TGLS | 100% | -2.47% | ||
| BCC - TGLS | 49% Loosely correlated | -8.14% | ||
| SUM - TGLS | 47% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| EXP - TGLS | 46% Loosely correlated | -3.76% | ||
| CRH - TGLS | 44% Loosely correlated | -2.18% | ||
| VMC - TGLS | 39% Loosely correlated | -2.22% | ||
More | ||||