CIHHF
Price
$4.46
Change
-$0.52 (-10.44%)
Updated
Jan 10 closing price
Capitalization
125.76B
SBGOF
Price
$11.93
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jan 14 closing price
Capitalization
17.82B
Ad is loading...

CIHHF vs SBGOF

Header iconCIHHF vs SBGOF Comparison
Open Charts CIHHF vs SBGOFBanner chart's image
China Merchants Bank
Price$4.46
Change-$0.52 (-10.44%)
Volume$5.25K
Capitalization125.76B
Standard Bank Group
Price$11.93
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$777
Capitalization17.82B
CIHHF vs SBGOF Comparison Chart
Loading...
CIHHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SBGOF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CIHHF vs. SBGOF commentary
Jan 19, 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 CIHHF is a Hold and SBGOF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (CIHHF: $4.46 vs. SBGOF: $11.93)
Brand notoriety: CIHHF and SBGOF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CIHHF: 2% vs. SBGOF: 38%
Market capitalization -- CIHHF: $125.76B vs. SBGOF: $17.82B
CIHHF [@Regional Banks] is valued at $125.76B. SBGOF’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $17.82B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $5.88B.

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).

CIHHF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileSBGOF’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

CIHHF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SBGOF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CIHHF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • SBGOF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both CIHHF and SBGOF are a bad buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

CIHHF (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SBGOF (@Regional Banks) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +3.11%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.42%, and the average quarterly price growth was +11.25%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+3.11% weekly)

Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CIHHF($126B) has a higher market cap than SBGOF($17.8B). SBGOF has higher P/E ratio than CIHHF: SBGOF (7.87) vs CIHHF (6.19). SBGOF YTD gains are higher at: 7.769 vs. CIHHF (-4.904). SBGOF has less debt than CIHHF: SBGOF (31.7B) vs CIHHF (524B). CIHHF has higher revenues than SBGOF: CIHHF (341B) vs SBGOF (138B).
CIHHFSBGOFCIHHF / SBGOF
Capitalization126B17.8B708%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-4.9047.769-63%
P/E Ratio6.197.8779%
Revenue341B138B247%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt524B31.7B1,653%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CIHHF vs SBGOF: Fundamental Ratings
CIHHF
SBGOF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
24
Undervalued
54
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10030
SMR RATING
1..100
11
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5662
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3828
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

CIHHF's Valuation (24) in the null industry is in the same range as SBGOF (54). This means that CIHHF’s stock grew similarly to SBGOF’s over the last 12 months.

SBGOF's Profit vs Risk Rating (30) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CIHHF (100). This means that SBGOF’s stock grew significantly faster than CIHHF’s over the last 12 months.

SBGOF's SMR Rating (1) in the null industry is in the same range as CIHHF (1). This means that SBGOF’s stock grew similarly to CIHHF’s over the last 12 months.

CIHHF's Price Growth Rating (56) in the null industry is in the same range as SBGOF (62). This means that CIHHF’s stock grew similarly to SBGOF’s over the last 12 months.

SBGOF's P/E Growth Rating (28) in the null industry is in the same range as CIHHF (38). This means that SBGOF’s stock grew similarly to CIHHF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CIHHFSBGOF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
50%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
52%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
50%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
42%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
43%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
40%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
32%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
42%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
29%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
45%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
38%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 20 days ago
75%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
54%
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
50%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
72%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CIHHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SBGOF
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 %
ROMO32.130.28
+0.88%
Strategy Shares Nwfnd/RSlv Rbt Mmt ETF
EEMA71.930.57
+0.80%
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF
FAN14.920.10
+0.64%
First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF
KROP10.03-0.01
-0.10%
Global X AgTech & Food Innovation ETF
FTGC25.02-0.06
-0.24%
First Trust Global Tact Cmdty Strat ETF

CIHHF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CIHHF has been loosely correlated with CAIB. These tickers have moved in lockstep 37% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CIHHF jumps, then CAIB could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CIHHF
1D Price
Change %
CIHHF100%
N/A
CAIB - CIHHF
37%
Loosely correlated
N/A
CIHKY - CIHHF
29%
Poorly correlated
+0.11%
SBGOF - CIHHF
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MTPOF - CIHHF
27%
Poorly correlated
+12.70%
HSNGY - CIHHF
26%
Poorly correlated
+1.13%
More

SBGOF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SBGOF has been loosely correlated with MTPOF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 54% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if SBGOF jumps, then MTPOF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SBGOF
1D Price
Change %
SBGOF100%
N/A
MTPOF - SBGOF
54%
Loosely correlated
+12.70%
CIHHF - SBGOF
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
VBFC - SBGOF
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MNBO - SBGOF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SNLC - SBGOF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A