CDNAF
Price
$111.31
Change
-$1.30 (-1.15%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
8B
CMEIF
Price
$0.30
Change
+$0.01 (+3.45%)
Updated
Oct 15 closing price
Capitalization
1.47B
Ad is loading...

CDNAF vs CMEIF

Header iconCDNAF vs CMEIF Comparison
Open Charts CDNAF vs CMEIFBanner chart's image
Canadian Tire
Price$111.31
Change-$1.30 (-1.15%)
Volume$10.61K
Capitalization8B
China Meidong Auto
Price$0.30
Change+$0.01 (+3.45%)
Volume$25K
Capitalization1.47B
CDNAF vs CMEIF Comparison Chart
Loading...
CDNAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CDNAF vs. CMEIF commentary
Jan 20, 2025

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 CDNAF is a Hold and CMEIF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 20, 2025
Stock price -- (CDNAF: $111.31 vs. CMEIF: $0.30)
Brand notoriety: CDNAF and CMEIF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Specialty Stores industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CDNAF: 140% vs. CMEIF: 100%
Market capitalization -- CDNAF: $8B vs. CMEIF: $1.47B
CDNAF [@Specialty Stores] is valued at $8B. CMEIF’s [@Specialty Stores] market capitalization is $1.47B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Specialty Stores] industry ranges from $380.15B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Specialty Stores] industry is $9.05B.

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).

CDNAF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileCMEIF’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

  • CDNAF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • CMEIF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
According to our system of comparison, CMEIF is a better buy in the long-term than CDNAF.

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.

CDNAF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • CDNAF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.

Price Growth

CDNAF (@Specialty Stores) experienced а +2.11% price change this week, while CMEIF (@Specialty Stores) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Specialty Stores industry was +1.91%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.66%, and the average quarterly price growth was -1.29%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Specialty Stores (+1.91% weekly)

The specialty stores sector includes companies dedicated to the sale of retail products focused on a single product category, such as clothing, carpet, books, or office supplies. A specialty store could face intense competition from big-box departmental chains, and therefore offering an adequate collection of the product type it specializes in is key in maintaining/growing its market.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CDNAF($8B) has a higher market cap than CMEIF($1.47B). CMEIF has higher P/E ratio than CDNAF: CMEIF (20.66) vs CDNAF (12.22). CDNAF YTD gains are higher at: 6.111 vs. CMEIF (0.000). CDNAF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 2.22B vs. CMEIF (1.62B). CMEIF has more cash in the bank: 3.5B vs. CDNAF (489M). CMEIF has less debt than CDNAF: CMEIF (5.54B) vs CDNAF (8.38B). CMEIF has higher revenues than CDNAF: CMEIF (24.4B) vs CDNAF (17.7B).
CDNAFCMEIFCDNAF / CMEIF
Capitalization8B1.47B544%
EBITDA2.22B1.62B137%
Gain YTD6.1110.000-
P/E Ratio12.2220.6659%
Revenue17.7B24.4B73%
Total Cash489M3.5B14%
Total Debt8.38B5.54B151%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CDNAF: Fundamental Ratings
CDNAF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
11
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
91
SMR RATING
1..100
63
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
50
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
97
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CDNAFCMEIF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
54%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
59%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
56%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
15%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
57%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
13%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 13 days ago
58%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 20 days ago
57%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
61%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CDNAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
LPFAX6.610.04
+0.61%
ALPS Global Opportunity A
ATGDX12.380.06
+0.49%
American Century International Gr R6
BUIIX21.110.06
+0.29%
Buffalo International Institutional
IFTAX10.140.02
+0.20%
Voya International High Div Low Vol A
JMGRX146.000.17
+0.12%
Janus Henderson Enterprise I

CDNAF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CDNAF has been loosely correlated with PAG. These tickers have moved in lockstep 47% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CDNAF jumps, then PAG could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CDNAF
1D Price
Change %
CDNAF100%
-1.15%
PAG - CDNAF
47%
Loosely correlated
+0.50%
SAH - CDNAF
47%
Loosely correlated
-0.03%
AN - CDNAF
44%
Loosely correlated
+1.34%
KMX - CDNAF
44%
Loosely correlated
-0.89%
LAD - CDNAF
43%
Loosely correlated
-1.60%
More

CMEIF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CMEIF and CZASF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CMEIF and CZASF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CMEIF
1D Price
Change %
CMEIF100%
N/A
CZASF - CMEIF
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FKRAF - CMEIF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CDNAF - CMEIF
4%
Poorly correlated
-1.15%
ANCTF - CMEIF
3%
Poorly correlated
+0.60%
CYYHF - CMEIF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More