Advertisement
CCOEF vs CINGF
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 CCOEF is a Hold and CINGF 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).
CCOEF’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileCINGF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CCOEF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
- CINGF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 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.
CCOEF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while CINGF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).
- CCOEF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 6 bearish.
- CINGF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
CCOEF (@Packaged Software) experienced а -3.92% price change this week, while CINGF (@Packaged Software) price change was -15.70% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Packaged Software industry was -1.04%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.36%, and the average quarterly price growth was +1.77%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Packaged Software (-1.04% weekly)Packaged software comprises multiple software programs bundled together and sold as a group. For example, Microsoft Office includes multiple applications such as Excel, Word, and PowerPoint. In some cases, buying a bundled product is cheaper than purchasing each item individually[s20] . Microsoft Corporation, Oracle Corp. and Adobe are some major American packaged software makers.
| CCOEF | CINGF | CCOEF / CINGF | |
| Capitalization | 9.51B | 2.1M | 453,362% |
| EBITDA | 67.8B | 318K | 21,320,755% |
| Gain YTD | 26.484 | 66.840 | 40% |
| P/E Ratio | 27.25 | 175.44 | 16% |
| Revenue | 145B | 214K | 67,757,009% |
| Total Cash | 109B | 173K | 63,005,780% |
| Total Debt | 7.84B | N/A | - |
CCOEF | CINGF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 90 | 55 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 17 Undervalued | 90 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 11 | 92 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 12 | 66 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 50 | 36 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 41 | 2 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 47 | 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.
CCOEF's Valuation (17) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CINGF (90). This means that CCOEF’s stock grew significantly faster than CINGF’s over the last 12 months.
CCOEF's Profit vs Risk Rating (11) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CINGF (92). This means that CCOEF’s stock grew significantly faster than CINGF’s over the last 12 months.
CCOEF's SMR Rating (12) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CINGF (66). This means that CCOEF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CINGF’s over the last 12 months.
CINGF's Price Growth Rating (36) in the null industry is in the same range as CCOEF (50). This means that CINGF’s stock grew similarly to CCOEF’s over the last 12 months.
CINGF's P/E Growth Rating (2) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CCOEF (41). This means that CINGF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CCOEF’s over the last 12 months.
| CCOEF | CINGF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 65% | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 57% | 1 day ago 90% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 40% | 1 day ago 90% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 37% | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 46% | 1 day ago 84% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 44% | 1 day ago 85% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 11 days ago 79% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 50% | 1 day ago 87% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 67% | 1 day ago 81% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 31% | 1 day ago 90% |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| BTGD | 39.89 | 1.58 | +4.13% |
| STKd 100% Bitcoin & 100% Gold ETF | |||
| PJIO | 61.03 | 0.15 | +0.24% |
| PGIM Jennison International Opps ETF | |||
| BSMW | 24.47 | 0.01 | +0.04% |
| Invesco BulletShares 2032 Muncpl Bd ETF | |||
| IYY | 154.28 | -0.03 | -0.02% |
| iShares Dow Jones US ETF | |||
| FISR | 25.80 | -0.02 | -0.09% |
| SPDR® SSGA Fixed Inc Sect Rotation ETF | |||
CCOEF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CCOEF and ASFT have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CCOEF and ASFT's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CCOEF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CCOEF | 100% | N/A | ||
| ASFT - CCOEF | 32% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ADSK - CCOEF | 25% Poorly correlated | -3.99% | ||
| RXT - CCOEF | 22% Poorly correlated | +4.10% | ||
| GBTG - CCOEF | 22% Poorly correlated | -1.09% | ||
| ONEI - CCOEF | 21% Poorly correlated | +9.69% | ||
More | ||||
CINGF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CINGF and VENZF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CINGF and VENZF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CINGF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CINGF | 100% | -10.11% | ||
| VENZF - CINGF | 30% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| FRGT - CINGF | 23% Poorly correlated | -3.17% | ||
| FOXO - CINGF | 23% Poorly correlated | -9.45% | ||
| SWONF - CINGF | 21% Poorly correlated | -0.67% | ||
| CCOEF - CINGF | 18% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||