CERGF
Price
$2.12
Change
-$0.27 (-11.30%)
Updated
Jan 16 closing price
Capitalization
55.14M
MCSHF
Price
$2.21
Change
-$0.34 (-13.33%)
Updated
Dec 3 closing price
Capitalization
2.34B
Ad is loading...

CERGF vs MCSHF

Header iconCERGF vs MCSHF Comparison
Open Charts CERGF vs MCSHFBanner chart's image
Ceres Global Ag
Price$2.12
Change-$0.27 (-11.30%)
Volume$200
Capitalization55.14M
Metcash
Price$2.21
Change-$0.34 (-13.33%)
Volume$100
Capitalization2.34B
CERGF vs MCSHF Comparison Chart
Loading...
CERGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MCSHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CERGF vs. MCSHF commentary
Jan 23, 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 CERGF is a Hold and MCSHF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 23, 2025
Stock price -- (CERGF: $2.12 vs. MCSHF: $2.21)
Brand notoriety: CERGF and MCSHF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Food Distributors industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CERGF: 1% vs. MCSHF: 50%
Market capitalization -- CERGF: $55.14M vs. MCSHF: $2.34B
CERGF [@Food Distributors] is valued at $55.14M. MCSHF’s [@Food Distributors] market capitalization is $2.34B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Food Distributors] industry ranges from $40.11B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Food Distributors] industry is $5B.

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).

CERGF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMCSHF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CERGF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MCSHF’s TA Score has 1 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CERGF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • MCSHF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 1 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, MCSHF is a better buy in the short-term than CERGF.

Price Growth

CERGF (@Food Distributors) experienced а -11.21% price change this week, while MCSHF (@Food Distributors) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food Distributors industry was -0.91%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -4.76%, and the average quarterly price growth was +3.88%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Food Distributors (-0.91% weekly)

Food distributors function as intermediaries between food manufacturers and food service operators (such as chefs, restaurants, beverage managers, cafeterias, industrial caterers, hospitals and nursing homes). Food distribution companies buy, store and then supply food items to the food service operators, thereby allowing the latter to have access to a wide range of food items from various manufacturers. Sysco Corporation, US Foods Holding Corp. and Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. are some of the biggest (by market cap) U.S. companies in this segment. Most food service operators buy from local, specialty, and/or broad line food service distributors on a daily or weekly basis. With the rise in e-commerce, consumers are increasingly expecting lower prices, faster service, and higher quality – something that potentially creates the impetus on distribution networks to raise their game.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
MCSHF($2.34B) has a higher market cap than CERGF($55.1M). MCSHF has higher P/E ratio than CERGF: MCSHF (13.61) vs CERGF (3.05). MCSHF YTD gains are higher at: 0.000 vs. CERGF (-0.836). MCSHF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 558M vs. CERGF (-13.91M). MCSHF has more cash in the bank: 107M vs. CERGF (7.12M). CERGF has less debt than MCSHF: CERGF (66.9M) vs MCSHF (1.32B). MCSHF has higher revenues than CERGF: MCSHF (15.8B) vs CERGF (1.11B).
CERGFMCSHFCERGF / MCSHF
Capitalization55.1M2.34B2%
EBITDA-13.91M558M-2%
Gain YTD-0.8360.000-
P/E Ratio3.0513.6122%
Revenue1.11B15.8B7%
Total Cash7.12M107M7%
Total Debt66.9M1.32B5%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CERGF vs MCSHF: Fundamental Ratings
CERGF
MCSHF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
9941
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
51
Fair valued
10
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10071
SMR RATING
1..100
8590
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5274
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3239
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.

MCSHF's Valuation (10) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CERGF (51). This means that MCSHF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CERGF’s over the last 12 months.

MCSHF's Profit vs Risk Rating (71) in the null industry is in the same range as CERGF (100). This means that MCSHF’s stock grew similarly to CERGF’s over the last 12 months.

CERGF's SMR Rating (85) in the null industry is in the same range as MCSHF (90). This means that CERGF’s stock grew similarly to MCSHF’s over the last 12 months.

CERGF's Price Growth Rating (52) in the null industry is in the same range as MCSHF (74). This means that CERGF’s stock grew similarly to MCSHF’s over the last 12 months.

CERGF's P/E Growth Rating (32) in the null industry is in the same range as MCSHF (39). This means that CERGF’s stock grew similarly to MCSHF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CERGFMCSHF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 15 days ago
64%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 15 days ago
52%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 15 days ago
52%
Bullish Trend 15 days ago
33%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 15 days ago
54%
Bullish Trend 15 days ago
20%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 15 days ago
54%
Bullish Trend 15 days ago
19%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 15 days ago
73%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 15 days ago
47%
Bearish Trend 15 days ago
45%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CERGF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MCSHF
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 %
GLOV50.760.49
+0.97%
Goldman Sachs ActBt Wld Lw Vl Ps Eq ETF
XLY230.901.68
+0.73%
The Consumer Discret Sel SectSPDR® ETF
APRZ34.960.22
+0.64%
TrueShares Structured Outcome April ETF
IG20.490.11
+0.54%
Principal Investment Grd Corp Actv ETF
NUEM29.130.05
+0.17%
Nuveen ESG Emerging Markets Equity ETF

CERGF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CERGF and MCSHF have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CERGF and MCSHF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CERGF
1D Price
Change %
CERGF100%
N/A
MCSHF - CERGF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JRONY - CERGF
14%
Poorly correlated
+1.17%
MCLE - CERGF
4%
Poorly correlated
+4.21%
MTTWF - CERGF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
KARNF - CERGF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

MCSHF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MCSHF and CERGF have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MCSHF and CERGF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MCSHF
1D Price
Change %
MCSHF100%
N/A
CERGF - MCSHF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JRONY - MCSHF
5%
Poorly correlated
+1.17%
OGOFF - MCSHF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MTTWF - MCSHF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
KARNF - MCSHF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More