CCDBF vs HOYFF
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 CCDBF is a Hold and HOYFF 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).
CCDBF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileHOYFF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- CCDBF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- HOYFF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
CCDBF (@Containers/Packaging) experienced а +1.64% price change this week, while HOYFF (@Containers/Packaging) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Containers/Packaging industry was -1.32%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.65%, and the average quarterly price growth was -4.52%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Containers/Packaging (-1.32% weekly)The containers/packing sector includes companies that manufacture containers (like plastic and aluminum food containers, glass bottles, metal cans, cardboard, storage and waste bags, giftwraps etc.) and provide packing services. Food-and-beverage and household products are major markets for this business. Several companies in this industry cater to international markets in addition to serving domestic customers. Consumer spending habits could potentially affect this industry’s performance. Some products, that use oil-based materials as inputs, are likely to see their costs of production get impacted (to some extent) by energy price movements. The ever-expanding e-commerce market has only supercharged the amount/frequency of goods shipped domestically and across borders, thereby creating ample potential opportunities for containers and packaging businesses. Ball Corporation, International Paper Company, Amcor Plc and Packaging Corporation of America are some of the largest U.S. companies in this industry.
| CCDBF | HOYFF | CCDBF / HOYFF | |
| Capitalization | 9.1B | 3.72B | 244% |
| EBITDA | 1.25B | 590M | 212% |
| Gain YTD | 1.356 | 0.000 | - |
| P/E Ratio | 23.44 | 14.77 | 159% |
| Revenue | 6.65B | 4.38B | 152% |
| Total Cash | 765M | 334M | 229% |
| Total Debt | 2.28B | 1.81B | 126% |
CCDBF | HOYFF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 53 Fair valued | 41 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 65 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 55 | 56 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 56 | 70 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
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.
HOYFF's Valuation (41) in the null industry is in the same range as CCDBF (53). This means that HOYFF’s stock grew similarly to CCDBF’s over the last 12 months.
CCDBF's Profit vs Risk Rating (65) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HOYFF (100). This means that CCDBF’s stock grew somewhat faster than HOYFF’s over the last 12 months.
CCDBF's SMR Rating (55) in the null industry is in the same range as HOYFF (56). This means that CCDBF’s stock grew similarly to HOYFF’s over the last 12 months.
CCDBF's Price Growth Rating (56) in the null industry is in the same range as HOYFF (70). This means that CCDBF’s stock grew similarly to HOYFF’s over the last 12 months.
CCDBF's P/E Growth Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as HOYFF (100). This means that CCDBF’s stock grew similarly to HOYFF’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| MFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| LICSX | 15.90 | 0.12 | +0.76% |
| Lord Abbett International Equity R4 | |||
| CMLEX | 56.73 | 0.41 | +0.73% |
| American Funds American Mutual 529E | |||
| JVSIX | 14.97 | 0.10 | +0.67% |
| Janus Henderson Small-Mid Cap Value I | |||
| JIGCX | 48.79 | 0.14 | +0.29% |
| Janus Henderson Overseas C | |||
| DPWRX | 67.37 | 0.07 | +0.10% |
| BNY Mellon Worldwide Growth I | |||
CCDBF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CCDBF and AVY have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CCDBF and AVY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CCDBF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CCDBF | 100% | +3.24% | ||
| AVY - CCDBF | 26% Poorly correlated | +0.84% | ||
| AMCCF - CCDBF | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| DITHF - CCDBF | -3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ACGX - CCDBF | -4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HOYFF - CCDBF | -4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
HOYFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that HOYFF and TCLAF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that HOYFF and TCLAF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To HOYFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HOYFF | 100% | N/A | ||
| TCLAF - HOYFF | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GRVWF - HOYFF | 15% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HXGCF - HOYFF | 14% Poorly correlated | -9.02% | ||
| FUJSF - HOYFF | 11% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| IFLXF - HOYFF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||