CICOF
Price
$1.75
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Aug 6 closing price
Capitalization
32.82B
MPZZF
Price
$1.87
Change
+$0.06 (+3.31%)
Updated
Aug 6 closing price
Capitalization
852.18M
Interact to see
Advertisement

CICOF vs MPZZF

Header iconCICOF vs MPZZF Comparison
Open Charts CICOF vs MPZZFBanner chart's image
COSCO SHIPPING Holdings
Price$1.75
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$225
Capitalization32.82B
MPC Container Ships AS
Price$1.87
Change+$0.06 (+3.31%)
Volume$8.6K
Capitalization852.18M
CICOF vs MPZZF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
CICOF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MPZZF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CICOF vs. MPZZF commentary
Aug 08, 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 CICOF is a Hold and MPZZF is a StrongBuy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 08, 2025
Stock price -- (CICOF: $1.75 vs. MPZZF: $1.92)
Brand notoriety: CICOF and MPZZF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Marine Shipping industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CICOF: 16% vs. MPZZF: 5%
Market capitalization -- CICOF: $32.82B vs. MPZZF: $852.18M
CICOF [@Marine Shipping] is valued at $32.82B. MPZZF’s [@Marine Shipping] market capitalization is $852.18M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Marine Shipping] industry ranges from $32.82B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Marine Shipping] industry is $4.74B.

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).

CICOF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMPZZF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CICOF’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MPZZF’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CICOF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • MPZZF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, MPZZF is a better buy in the short-term than CICOF.

Price Growth

CICOF (@Marine Shipping) experienced а -7.89% price change this week, while MPZZF (@Marine Shipping) price change was +9.09% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Marine Shipping industry was +2.22%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +5.26%, and the average quarterly price growth was +9.52%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Marine Shipping (+2.22% weekly)

The marine shipping industry provides passenger transportation or cargo shipping services via waterways. This industry includes freight towage, ferry services and warehousing on deep-sea and inland waterways. The aviation sector may have reduced the popularity of sea travel for several passengers, but it is still in demand for short trips and pleasure cruises. Teekay Offshore Partners L.P. Cum Red Perp Pfd., Kirby Corporation and Seaspan Corporation are some of the well-known names in the business.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CICOF($32.8B) has a higher market cap than MPZZF($852M). CICOF has higher P/E ratio than MPZZF: CICOF (4.08) vs MPZZF (3.43). CICOF YTD gains are higher at: 6.707 vs. MPZZF (5.900). CICOF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 35.9B vs. MPZZF (336M). CICOF has higher revenues than MPZZF: CICOF (176B) vs MPZZF (520M).
CICOFMPZZFCICOF / MPZZF
Capitalization32.8B852M3,850%
EBITDA35.9B336M10,685%
Gain YTD6.7075.900114%
P/E Ratio4.083.43119%
Revenue176B520M33,846%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total DebtN/A433M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CICOF vs MPZZF: Fundamental Ratings
CICOF
MPZZF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8923
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
4
Undervalued
2
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
39100
SMR RATING
1..100
6430
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4743
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9047
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
2222

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.

MPZZF's Valuation (2) in the null industry is in the same range as CICOF (4). This means that MPZZF’s stock grew similarly to CICOF’s over the last 12 months.

CICOF's Profit vs Risk Rating (39) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MPZZF (100). This means that CICOF’s stock grew somewhat faster than MPZZF’s over the last 12 months.

MPZZF's SMR Rating (30) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CICOF (64). This means that MPZZF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CICOF’s over the last 12 months.

MPZZF's Price Growth Rating (43) in the null industry is in the same range as CICOF (47). This means that MPZZF’s stock grew similarly to CICOF’s over the last 12 months.

MPZZF's P/E Growth Rating (47) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CICOF (90). This means that MPZZF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CICOF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CICOFMPZZF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
88%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
68%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
74%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
68%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
71%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
67%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
86%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
65%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
79%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
78%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
62%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
81%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
72%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
73%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
69%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
68%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CICOF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MPZZF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SGA12.750.65
+5.37%
Saga Communications
GLAD27.06-0.30
-1.08%
Gladstone Capital Corp
OPEN1.85-0.05
-2.63%
Opendoor Technologies
CISS3.41-0.10
-2.85%
C3is Inc
ELF99.92-10.47
-9.48%
elf Beauty

CICOF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CICOF and MPZZF have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CICOF and MPZZF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CICOF
1D Price
Change %
CICOF100%
N/A
MPZZF - CICOF
24%
Poorly correlated
+2.81%
AMKAF - CICOF
22%
Poorly correlated
+9.08%
DSX - CICOF
21%
Poorly correlated
-1.28%
KNOP - CICOF
18%
Poorly correlated
-0.71%
CICOY - CICOF
18%
Poorly correlated
+0.66%
More

MPZZF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MPZZF has been loosely correlated with HPGLY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 38% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MPZZF jumps, then HPGLY could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MPZZF
1D Price
Change %
MPZZF100%
+3.18%
HPGLY - MPZZF
38%
Loosely correlated
N/A
AMKBY - MPZZF
36%
Loosely correlated
+0.99%
SBLK - MPZZF
36%
Loosely correlated
-0.83%
HAFN - MPZZF
35%
Loosely correlated
-2.19%
HLAGF - MPZZF
34%
Loosely correlated
N/A
More