Advertisement
CHFFF vs CWSFF
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 CHFFF is a Hold and CWSFF 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).
CHFFF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileCWSFF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- CHFFF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- CWSFF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 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.
CWSFF’s TA Score shows that 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- CWSFF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 7 bearish.
Price Growth
CHFFF (@Environmental Services) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while CWSFF (@Environmental Services) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Environmental Services industry was +2.14%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.46%, and the average quarterly price growth was +9.17%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Environmental Services (+2.14% weekly)Environmental Services includes companies that collect and dispose of hazardous and non-hazardous waste. Their services include removal of toxic waste from soil, removing medical waste etc. Some companies also operate incinerators, sewerage systems, waste treatment plants, and landfills. Demand for waste management is likely to rise with increasing urbanization/industrialization. Waste Management, Inc., Republic Services, Inc., Waste Connections, Inc. and Tetra Tech, Inc. are some of the major companies in this business.
| CHFFF | CWSFF | CHFFF / CWSFF | |
| Capitalization | 3.4B | 5.15M | 65,955% |
| EBITDA | N/A | -39.82M | - |
| Gain YTD | 1.248 | -47.051 | -3% |
| P/E Ratio | 6.72 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | N/A | 0 | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | 67K | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 2.4M | - |
CHFFF | CWSFF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 36 | 89 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 12 Undervalued | 98 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 66 | 99 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 56 | 62 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 14 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 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.
CHFFF's Valuation (12) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CWSFF (98). This means that CHFFF’s stock grew significantly faster than CWSFF’s over the last 12 months.
CHFFF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as CWSFF (100). This means that CHFFF’s stock grew similarly to CWSFF’s over the last 12 months.
CHFFF's SMR Rating (66) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CWSFF (99). This means that CHFFF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CWSFF’s over the last 12 months.
CHFFF's Price Growth Rating (56) in the null industry is in the same range as CWSFF (62). This means that CHFFF’s stock grew similarly to CWSFF’s over the last 12 months.
CHFFF's P/E Growth Rating (14) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CWSFF (100). This means that CHFFF’s stock grew significantly faster than CWSFF’s over the last 12 months.
| CHFFF | CWSFF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 88% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 84% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 83% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 90% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 23% | 2 days ago 84% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 19% | 2 days ago 83% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | 21 days ago 90% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 74% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
Advertisement
CHFFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CHFFF and QRHC have been poorly correlated (+11% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CHFFF and QRHC's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CHFFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHFFF | 100% | N/A | ||
| QRHC - CHFFF | 11% Poorly correlated | -4.49% | ||
| BWPC - CHFFF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ESGL - CHFFF | 0% Poorly correlated | -3.23% | ||
| WCN - CHFFF | -0% Poorly correlated | -0.89% | ||
| CHFFY - CHFFF | -1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
CWSFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CWSFF and CHFFY have been poorly correlated (+22% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CWSFF and CHFFY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CWSFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CWSFF | 100% | -7.58% | ||
| CHFFY - CWSFF | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ESGL - CWSFF | 13% Poorly correlated | -3.23% | ||
| BTQNF - CWSFF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| WCN - CWSFF | -0% Poorly correlated | -0.89% | ||
| CHFFF - CWSFF | -3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||