CLF vs LIFZF
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 CLF is a Sell and LIFZF 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).
CLF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileLIFZF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- CLF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- LIFZF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 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.
CLF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- CLF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
Price Growth
CLF (@Steel) experienced а -14.22% price change this week, while LIFZF (@Steel) price change was -3.34% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Steel industry was -2.56%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.98%, and the average quarterly price growth was -6.23%.
Reported Earning Dates
CLF is expected to report earnings on Feb 07, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Steel (-2.56% weekly)The steel industry includes manufacturers of steel and steel-related products. Companies use iron ore and scrap steel to produce steel. The industry also includes companies involved in mining and marketing of steel products. Along with serving some of the domestic markets, U.S. steel output has, over the years, been used by international economies as well. Competition from imported steel has also increased over time. The industry could be susceptible to business cycles, since the element is an important input in industrial production. Some of the globally-renowned steel behemoths include Nucor Corporation, Vale, and ArcelorMittal SA.
| CLF | LIFZF | CLF / LIFZF | |
| Capitalization | 5.45B | 1.32B | 413% |
| EBITDA | 1.34B | 166M | 805% |
| Gain YTD | -45.935 | -14.509 | 317% |
| P/E Ratio | 145.67 | 9.46 | 1,540% |
| Revenue | 21B | 211M | 9,953% |
| Total Cash | 110M | 67.7M | 162% |
| Total Debt | 3.51B | N/A | - |
CLF | LIFZF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 59 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 91 Overvalued | 4 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 78 | 79 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 86 | 31 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 85 | 76 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 3 | 71 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 95 | 95 |
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.
LIFZF's Valuation (4) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CLF (91) in the Steel industry. This means that LIFZF’s stock grew significantly faster than CLF’s over the last 12 months.
CLF's Profit vs Risk Rating (78) in the Steel industry is in the same range as LIFZF (79) in the null industry. This means that CLF’s stock grew similarly to LIFZF’s over the last 12 months.
LIFZF's SMR Rating (31) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CLF (86) in the Steel industry. This means that LIFZF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CLF’s over the last 12 months.
LIFZF's Price Growth Rating (76) in the null industry is in the same range as CLF (85) in the Steel industry. This means that LIFZF’s stock grew similarly to CLF’s over the last 12 months.
CLF's P/E Growth Rating (3) in the Steel industry is significantly better than the same rating for LIFZF (71) in the null industry. This means that CLF’s stock grew significantly faster than LIFZF’s over the last 12 months.
| CLF | |
|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 74% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 79% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 73% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 79% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 81% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 84% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 20 days ago 78% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 83% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 75% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 81% |
CLF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CLF has been closely correlated with NUE. These tickers have moved in lockstep 72% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if CLF jumps, then NUE could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CLF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLF | 100% | -3.66% | ||
| NUE - CLF | 72% Closely correlated | +0.48% | ||
| STLD - CLF | 65% Loosely correlated | +1.16% | ||
| CMC - CLF | 58% Loosely correlated | -0.13% | ||
| RS - CLF | 57% Loosely correlated | +0.15% | ||
| RDUS - CLF | 54% Loosely correlated | +2.19% | ||
More | ||||
LIFZF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, LIFZF has been loosely correlated with MT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if LIFZF jumps, then MT could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LIFZF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LIFZF | 100% | -0.34% | ||
| MT - LIFZF | 35% Loosely correlated | +3.18% | ||
| SID - LIFZF | 33% Poorly correlated | +2.67% | ||
| TX - LIFZF | 31% Poorly correlated | +2.30% | ||
| CLF - LIFZF | 31% Poorly correlated | -3.66% | ||
| MSB - LIFZF | 29% Poorly correlated | -1.16% | ||
More | ||||