CGGGF vs LNZNF
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 CGGGF is a Hold and LNZNF 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).
CGGGF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileLNZNF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CGGGF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- LNZNF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CGGGF (@Textiles) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while LNZNF (@Textiles) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Textiles industry was -2.08%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.40%, and the average quarterly price growth was -4.68%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Textiles (-2.08% weekly)The textiles industry includes companies that spin fiber and weave fabrics into raw products such as polyester filaments and staple yarns that are manufactured into finished products. Albany International Corp., Unifi, Inc. and Culp, Inc. are some of the major players in this business.
| CGGGF | LNZNF | CGGGF / LNZNF | |
| Capitalization | 1.44B | 1.95B | 74% |
| EBITDA | 234M | 192M | 122% |
| Gain YTD | 33.489 | -4.679 | -716% |
| P/E Ratio | 31.65 | 29.76 | 106% |
| Revenue | 1.58B | 2.57B | 62% |
| Total Cash | N/A | 435M | - |
| Total Debt | 672M | 2.07B | 32% |
CGGGF | LNZNF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 40 Fair valued | 6 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 45 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 72 | 95 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 52 | 53 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 43 | 37 | |
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.
LNZNF's Valuation (6) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CGGGF (40). This means that LNZNF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CGGGF’s over the last 12 months.
CGGGF's Profit vs Risk Rating (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LNZNF (100). This means that CGGGF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LNZNF’s over the last 12 months.
CGGGF's SMR Rating (72) in the null industry is in the same range as LNZNF (95). This means that CGGGF’s stock grew similarly to LNZNF’s over the last 12 months.
CGGGF's Price Growth Rating (52) in the null industry is in the same range as LNZNF (53). This means that CGGGF’s stock grew similarly to LNZNF’s over the last 12 months.
LNZNF's P/E Growth Rating (37) in the null industry is in the same range as CGGGF (43). This means that LNZNF’s stock grew similarly to CGGGF’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 % |
| GSIKX | 17.88 | -0.06 | -0.33% |
| Goldman Sachs International Eq Inc Instl | |||
| MITJX | 39.19 | -0.48 | -1.21% |
| MFS Massachusetts Investors Tr R6 | |||
| EXOSX | 32.28 | -0.40 | -1.22% |
| Manning & Napier Overseas Series I | |||
| DCFGX | 39.19 | -0.99 | -2.46% |
| Dunham Focused Large Cap Growth C | |||
| EFCNX | 20.54 | -0.57 | -2.70% |
| Emerald Insights Investor | |||
CGGGF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CGGGF and TRYIY have been poorly correlated (+6% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CGGGF and TRYIY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CGGGF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGGGF | 100% | N/A | ||
| TRYIY - CGGGF | 6% Poorly correlated | -0.60% | ||
| LNZNF - CGGGF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SZHIF - CGGGF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| TRYIF - CGGGF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| AIN - CGGGF | -0% Poorly correlated | -0.53% | ||
More | ||||
LNZNF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LNZNF and SHZHY have been poorly correlated (+7% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LNZNF and SHZHY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LNZNF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LNZNF | 100% | N/A | ||
| SHZHY - LNZNF | 7% Poorly correlated | -0.42% | ||
| CGGGF - LNZNF | 4% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CULP - LNZNF | 4% Poorly correlated | +0.80% | ||
| TRYIF - LNZNF | 2% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| UFI - LNZNF | 1% Poorly correlated | -0.88% | ||
More | ||||