CIIHY vs DMGGF
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 CIIHY is a Buy and DMGGF 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).
CIIHY’s FA Score shows that 4 FA rating(s) are green whileDMGGF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- CIIHY’s FA Score: 4 green, 1 red.
- DMGGF’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.
CIIHY’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while DMGGF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).
- CIIHY’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 2 bearish.
- DMGGF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 6 bearish.
Price Growth
CIIHY (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while DMGGF (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was -12.88% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was -2.66%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.35%, and the average quarterly price growth was +28.30%.
Reported Earning Dates
DMGGF is expected to report earnings on Feb 27, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Investment Banks/Brokers (-2.66% weekly)These banks specialize in underwriting (helping companies with debt financing or equity issuances), IPOs, facilitating mergers and other corporate reorganizations and acting as a broker or financial advisor for institutions. They might also trade securities on their own accounts. Investment banks potentially thrive on expanding its network of clients, since that could help them increase profits. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and CME Group Inc are some of the largest investment banking companies.
| CIIHY | DMGGF | CIIHY / DMGGF | |
| Capitalization | 46.1B | 55M | 83,818% |
| EBITDA | N/A | -7.99M | - |
| Gain YTD | 51.269 | -36.855 | -139% |
| P/E Ratio | 10.44 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 64.5B | 31.9M | 202,194% |
| Total Cash | N/A | 5.06M | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 1.39M | - |
CIIHY | DMGGF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 34 | 60 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 26 Undervalued | 50 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 32 | 91 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 9 | 88 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 36 | 76 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 9 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 75 | 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.
CIIHY's Valuation (26) in the null industry is in the same range as DMGGF (50). This means that CIIHY’s stock grew similarly to DMGGF’s over the last 12 months.
CIIHY's Profit vs Risk Rating (32) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for DMGGF (91). This means that CIIHY’s stock grew somewhat faster than DMGGF’s over the last 12 months.
CIIHY's SMR Rating (9) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for DMGGF (88). This means that CIIHY’s stock grew significantly faster than DMGGF’s over the last 12 months.
CIIHY's Price Growth Rating (36) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for DMGGF (76). This means that CIIHY’s stock grew somewhat faster than DMGGF’s over the last 12 months.
CIIHY's P/E Growth Rating (9) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for DMGGF (100). This means that CIIHY’s stock grew significantly faster than DMGGF’s over the last 12 months.
| CIIHY | DMGGF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 65% | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 53% | 1 day ago 90% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 41% | 1 day ago 88% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 64% | 1 day ago 90% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 42% | 1 day ago 90% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 39% | 1 day ago 90% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 16 days ago 90% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 90% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 89% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 89% |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| GGRW | 31.19 | N/A | N/A |
| Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF | |||
| ASHR | 26.81 | -0.33 | -1.22% |
| Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A ETF | |||
| GII | 57.64 | -1.52 | -2.56% |
| SPDR® S&P® Global Infrastructure ETF | |||
| FLQS | 42.02 | -1.58 | -3.63% |
| Franklin US Small Cap Mltfctr Idx ETF | |||
| FLBR | 14.57 | -0.90 | -5.82% |
| Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF | |||
CIIHY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CIIHY and FUTU have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CIIHY and FUTU's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CIIHY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIIHY | 100% | N/A | ||
| FUTU - CIIHY | 24% Poorly correlated | -3.46% | ||
| TIGR - CIIHY | 22% Poorly correlated | -8.66% | ||
| CESTY - CIIHY | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| DMGGF - CIIHY | 4% Poorly correlated | -10.23% | ||
| CSOL - CIIHY | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
DMGGF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, DMGGF has been closely correlated with HUT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 68% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if DMGGF jumps, then HUT could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To DMGGF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DMGGF | 100% | -10.23% | ||
| HUT - DMGGF | 68% Closely correlated | -11.78% | ||
| HIVE - DMGGF | 67% Closely correlated | -11.46% | ||
| BTBT - DMGGF | 60% Loosely correlated | -12.09% | ||
| RIOT - DMGGF | 60% Loosely correlated | -14.46% | ||
| CLSK - DMGGF | 59% Loosely correlated | -8.41% | ||
More | ||||