CLSZF vs UGP
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 CLSZF is a Hold and UGP 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).
CLSZF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileUGP’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CLSZF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- UGP’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.
UGP’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- UGP’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
CLSZF (@Oil Refining/Marketing) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while UGP (@Oil Refining/Marketing) price change was -17.63% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Oil Refining/Marketing industry was -3.31%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -5.33%, and the average quarterly price growth was -11.96%.
Reported Earning Dates
UGP is expected to report earnings on Feb 19, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Oil Refining/Marketing (-3.31% weekly)The Oil Refining/Marketing segment includes companies that refine crude oil into a number of petroleum products, including gasoline, jet fuel and diesel, and then sell the usable products to the end users. These companies are involved in what’s called downstream operations in the oil business. They also engage in the marketing and distribution of crude oil and natural gas products. In other words, the downstream oil and gas business is focused on post-production processes of crude oil and natural gas. When oil prices slump, downstream businesses are hurt less or in some cases even benefit, since their purchase cost of crude oil goes down. Some of the biggest U.S. oil refining/marketing companies include Phillips 66, Marathon Petroleum Corporation and Valero Energy Corp.
| CLSZF | UGP | CLSZF / UGP | |
| Capitalization | 176M | 6.19B | 3% |
| EBITDA | 2.57B | 5.85B | 44% |
| Gain YTD | 0.000 | -51.435 | - |
| P/E Ratio | 1.61 | 12.68 | 13% |
| Revenue | 15.6B | 129B | 12% |
| Total Cash | 3.69B | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 8.77B | N/A | - |
CLSZF | UGP | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 34 | 9 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 53 Fair valued | 31 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 97 | 47 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 70 | 90 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 88 | 95 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
UGP's Valuation (31) in the Oil Refining Or Marketing industry is in the same range as CLSZF (53) in the null industry. This means that UGP’s stock grew similarly to CLSZF’s over the last 12 months.
UGP's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the Oil Refining Or Marketing industry is in the same range as CLSZF (100) in the null industry. This means that UGP’s stock grew similarly to CLSZF’s over the last 12 months.
UGP's SMR Rating (47) in the Oil Refining Or Marketing industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CLSZF (97) in the null industry. This means that UGP’s stock grew somewhat faster than CLSZF’s over the last 12 months.
CLSZF's Price Growth Rating (70) in the null industry is in the same range as UGP (90) in the Oil Refining Or Marketing industry. This means that CLSZF’s stock grew similarly to UGP’s over the last 12 months.
CLSZF's P/E Growth Rating (88) in the null industry is in the same range as UGP (95) in the Oil Refining Or Marketing industry. This means that CLSZF’s stock grew similarly to UGP’s over the last 12 months.
| CLSZF | UGP | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 77% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 71% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | 7 days ago 71% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 77% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 27% | 2 days ago 80% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 26% | 2 days ago 81% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 8 days ago 74% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | 3 days ago 80% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 68% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 85% |
CLSZF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CLSZF and CTXAF have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CLSZF and CTXAF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CLSZF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLSZF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CTXAF - CLSZF | 21% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PARR - CLSZF | 9% Poorly correlated | +3.96% | ||
| CAPL - CLSZF | 7% Poorly correlated | +0.14% | ||
| PBF - CLSZF | 7% Poorly correlated | +0.29% | ||
| UGP - CLSZF | 7% Poorly correlated | +1.85% | ||
More | ||||
UGP and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, UGP has been closely correlated with CSAN. These tickers have moved in lockstep 70% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if UGP jumps, then CSAN could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To UGP | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UGP | 100% | -6.55% | ||
| CSAN - UGP | 70% Closely correlated | -8.21% | ||
| CTXAY - UGP | 28% Poorly correlated | -3.18% | ||
| VVV - UGP | 25% Poorly correlated | -2.65% | ||
| BPT - UGP | 24% Poorly correlated | -0.62% | ||
| CLNE - UGP | 22% Poorly correlated | -4.80% | ||
More | ||||