Advertisement
CLPBY vs SEMHF
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 CLPBY is a Hold and SEMHF 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).
CLPBY’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileSEMHF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CLPBY’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- SEMHF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 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.
CLPBY’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SEMHF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- CLPBY’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.
- SEMHF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
CLPBY (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) experienced а -9.25% price change this week, while SEMHF (@Medical/Nursing Services) price change was -4.12% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pharmaceuticals: Other industry was -1.30%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.34%, and the average quarterly price growth was +8.48%.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Medical/Nursing Services industry was -1.74%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.22%, and the average quarterly price growth was +9.80%.
Reported Earning Dates
CLPBY is expected to report earnings on Nov 04, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pharmaceuticals: Other (-1.30% weekly)Pharmaceuticals (Other) comprise companies that are involved in the discovery, development or manufacturing of therapeutic and preventative medicines. They often collaborate with or acquire other pharmaceutical/healthcare firms. Examples of companies in this segment include Bausch Health Companies Inc., Icon Plc and Perrigo Company Plc.
@Medical/Nursing Services (-1.74% weekly)The medical/nursing services includes companies that provide medical-related services such as ambulance services, dialysis centers, respiratory therapy, blood testing and rehabilitation services. DaVita Inc., Chemed Corporation and Guardant Health, Inc. are examples of companies in this industry.
| CLPBY | SEMHF | CLPBY / SEMHF | |
| Capitalization | 20.4B | 61.5B | 33% |
| EBITDA | 8.34B | 4.68B | 178% |
| Gain YTD | -20.741 | -0.680 | 3,048% |
| P/E Ratio | 29.83 | 23.05 | 129% |
| Revenue | 27.9B | 23.4B | 119% |
| Total Cash | 726M | 2.77B | 26% |
| Total Debt | 24.2B | 735M | 3,293% |
CLPBY | SEMHF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 51 | 76 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 14 Undervalued | 16 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 88 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 38 | 62 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 82 | 73 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 78 | 77 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 65 | 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.
CLPBY's Valuation (14) in the null industry is in the same range as SEMHF (16). This means that CLPBY’s stock grew similarly to SEMHF’s over the last 12 months.
SEMHF's Profit vs Risk Rating (88) in the null industry is in the same range as CLPBY (100). This means that SEMHF’s stock grew similarly to CLPBY’s over the last 12 months.
CLPBY's SMR Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as SEMHF (62). This means that CLPBY’s stock grew similarly to SEMHF’s over the last 12 months.
SEMHF's Price Growth Rating (73) in the null industry is in the same range as CLPBY (82). This means that SEMHF’s stock grew similarly to CLPBY’s over the last 12 months.
SEMHF's P/E Growth Rating (77) in the null industry is in the same range as CLPBY (78). This means that SEMHF’s stock grew similarly to CLPBY’s over the last 12 months.
| CLPBY | SEMHF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 59% | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 60% | 2 days ago 48% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 60% | 2 days ago 52% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 61% | 2 days ago 54% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 56% | 2 days ago 44% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 55% | 2 days ago 43% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 29 days ago 60% | 23 days ago 54% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 55% | 2 days ago 40% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 60% | 2 days ago 50% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 45% | 2 days ago 40% |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| QTOC | 33.21 | -0.01 | -0.02% |
| Innovator Growth Accelertd Pls ETF™ Oct | |||
| JEPQ | 57.10 | -0.07 | -0.12% |
| JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Inc ETF | |||
| LDP | 21.76 | -0.08 | -0.37% |
| Cohen & Steers Limited | |||
| BUFS | 22.30 | -0.11 | -0.49% |
| FT Vest Laddered Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF | |||
| LOWV | 77.61 | -1.00 | -1.27% |
| AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF | |||
CLPBY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CLPBY has been loosely correlated with CLPBF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 38% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CLPBY jumps, then CLPBF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CLPBY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLPBY | 100% | -4.58% | ||
| CLPBF - CLPBY | 38% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| SAUHY - CLPBY | 34% Loosely correlated | -1.96% | ||
| SMMNY - CLPBY | 33% Poorly correlated | -4.33% | ||
| SONVY - CLPBY | 32% Poorly correlated | -4.07% | ||
| ESLOY - CLPBY | 32% Poorly correlated | -1.24% | ||
More | ||||
SEMHF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that SEMHF and ECIA have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SEMHF and ECIA's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To SEMHF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEMHF | 100% | -4.82% | ||
| ECIA - SEMHF | 23% Poorly correlated | +8.99% | ||
| CLPBY - SEMHF | 22% Poorly correlated | -4.58% | ||
| SARTF - SEMHF | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SKHCF - SEMHF | 5% Poorly correlated | -11.31% | ||
| SAUHY - SEMHF | 5% Poorly correlated | -1.96% | ||
More | ||||