CDNAF
Price
$107.73
Change
-$1.95 (-1.78%)
Updated
Apr 23 closing price
Capitalization
8B
PAG
Price
$157.83
Change
+$2.84 (+1.83%)
Updated
Apr 24, 02:41 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
10.86B
6 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

CDNAF vs PAG

Header iconCDNAF vs PAG Comparison
Open Charts CDNAF vs PAGBanner chart's image
Canadian Tire
Price$107.73
Change-$1.95 (-1.78%)
Volume$5.49K
Capitalization8B
Penske Automotive Group
Price$157.83
Change+$2.84 (+1.83%)
Volume$269
Capitalization10.86B
CDNAF vs PAG Comparison Chart
Loading...
CDNAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
PAG
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CDNAF vs. PAG commentary
Apr 24, 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 PAG is a Buy.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Apr 24, 2025
Stock price -- (CDNAF: $107.73 vs. PAG: $154.99)
Brand notoriety: CDNAF and PAG are both not notable
Both companies represent the Specialty Stores industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CDNAF: 71% vs. PAG: 87%
Market capitalization -- CDNAF: $8B vs. PAG: $10.86B
CDNAF [@Specialty Stores] is valued at $8B. PAG’s [@Specialty Stores] market capitalization is $10.86B. 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 $8.27B.

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 whilePAG’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

  • CDNAF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • PAG’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
According to our system of comparison, PAG 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 7 TA indicator(s) are bullish while PAG’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CDNAF’s TA Score: 7 bullish, 1 bearish.
  • PAG’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, CDNAF is a better buy in the short-term than PAG.

Price Growth

CDNAF (@Specialty Stores) experienced а +1.78% price change this week, while PAG (@Specialty Stores) price change was +3.54% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Specialty Stores industry was +2.48%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.69%, and the average quarterly price growth was -8.84%.

Reported Earning Dates

PAG is expected to report earnings on Jul 23, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Specialty Stores (+2.48% 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
PAG($10.9B) has a higher market cap than CDNAF($8B). CDNAF has higher P/E ratio than PAG: CDNAF (12.22) vs PAG (10.37). CDNAF YTD gains are higher at: 2.698 vs. PAG (2.437). CDNAF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 2.22B vs. PAG (1.79B). CDNAF has more cash in the bank: 489M vs. PAG (96.4M). PAG has less debt than CDNAF: PAG (7.74B) vs CDNAF (8.38B). PAG has higher revenues than CDNAF: PAG (29.5B) vs CDNAF (17.7B).
CDNAFPAGCDNAF / PAG
Capitalization8B10.9B73%
EBITDA2.22B1.79B124%
Gain YTD2.6982.437111%
P/E Ratio12.2210.37118%
Revenue17.7B29.5B60%
Total Cash489M96.4M507%
Total Debt8.38B7.74B108%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CDNAF vs PAG: Fundamental Ratings
CDNAF
PAG
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
1911
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
10
Undervalued
28
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
554
SMR RATING
1..100
5448
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4849
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9828
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50n/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.

CDNAF's Valuation (10) in the null industry is in the same range as PAG (28) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that CDNAF’s stock grew similarly to PAG’s over the last 12 months.

PAG's Profit vs Risk Rating (4) in the Specialty Stores industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CDNAF (55) in the null industry. This means that PAG’s stock grew somewhat faster than CDNAF’s over the last 12 months.

PAG's SMR Rating (48) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as CDNAF (54) in the null industry. This means that PAG’s stock grew similarly to CDNAF’s over the last 12 months.

CDNAF's Price Growth Rating (48) in the null industry is in the same range as PAG (49) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that CDNAF’s stock grew similarly to PAG’s over the last 12 months.

PAG's P/E Growth Rating (28) in the Specialty Stores industry is significantly better than the same rating for CDNAF (98) in the null industry. This means that PAG’s stock grew significantly faster than CDNAF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CDNAFPAG
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
52%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
58%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
57%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
67%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
50%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
69%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
58%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
70%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
68%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
72%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 17 days ago
58%
Bearish Trend 9 days ago
57%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
50%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
42%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CDNAF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
PAG
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
LCG27.610.68
+2.53%
Sterling Capital Focus Equity ETF
BCHP31.770.65
+2.10%
Principal Focused Blue Chip ETF
IWR81.730.99
+1.23%
iShares Russell Mid-Cap ETF
SILJ12.300.09
+0.74%
Amplify Junior Silver Miners ETF
MSOS2.40-0.02
-0.83%
AdvisorShares Pure US Cannabis ETF

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%
-1.77%
PAG - CDNAF
47%
Loosely correlated
+0.18%
SAH - CDNAF
47%
Loosely correlated
-1.21%
AN - CDNAF
44%
Loosely correlated
-0.09%
KMX - CDNAF
44%
Loosely correlated
+1.15%
LAD - CDNAF
43%
Loosely correlated
-5.81%
More

PAG and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, PAG has been closely correlated with GPI. These tickers have moved in lockstep 85% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if PAG jumps, then GPI could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To PAG
1D Price
Change %
PAG100%
+0.18%
GPI - PAG
85%
Closely correlated
-0.79%
ABG - PAG
82%
Closely correlated
-1.65%
SAH - PAG
82%
Closely correlated
-1.21%
AN - PAG
79%
Closely correlated
-0.09%
LAD - PAG
71%
Closely correlated
-5.81%
More