CODAF vs GWSO
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 CODAF is a Hold and GWSO 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).
CODAF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileGWSO’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- CODAF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- GWSO’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
CODAF (@Electronic Equipment/Instruments) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while GWSO (@Electronic Equipment/Instruments) price change was -6.29% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Electronic Equipment/Instruments industry was +261.59%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +151.43%, and the average quarterly price growth was +35.27%.
Reported Earning Dates
GWSO is expected to report earnings on Apr 14, 2023.
Industries' Descriptions
@Electronic Equipment/Instruments (+261.59% weekly)This industry manufactures electronic products used in various critical and sophisticated technologies, including laser-based systems, circuit and continuity testers, electro-optical measuring instruments and high-speed precision weighing and inspection equipment. Some major companies operating in this business are Canon Inc., Keysight Technologies Inc., and Fortive Corp.
| CODAF | GWSO | CODAF / GWSO | |
| Capitalization | 1.28B | 40.1M | 3,202% |
| EBITDA | 103M | -1.21M | -8,526% |
| Gain YTD | 28.070 | -45.424 | -62% |
| P/E Ratio | 25.56 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 511M | 0 | - |
| Total Cash | 22.4M | 28.8K | 77,778% |
| Total Debt | 56.1M | 380K | 14,763% |
CODAF | GWSO | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 43 | 15 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 16 Undervalued | 99 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 55 | 88 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 54 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 50 | 40 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 54 | 100 | |
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.
CODAF's Valuation (16) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for GWSO (99). This means that CODAF’s stock grew significantly faster than GWSO’s over the last 12 months.
CODAF's Profit vs Risk Rating (55) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GWSO (88). This means that CODAF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GWSO’s over the last 12 months.
CODAF's SMR Rating (54) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GWSO (100). This means that CODAF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GWSO’s over the last 12 months.
GWSO's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as CODAF (50). This means that GWSO’s stock grew similarly to CODAF’s over the last 12 months.
CODAF's P/E Growth Rating (54) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GWSO (100). This means that CODAF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GWSO’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
CODAF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CODAF and HXGBY have been poorly correlated (+13% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CODAF and HXGBY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CODAF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CODAF | 100% | N/A | ||
| HXGBY - CODAF | 13% Poorly correlated | -0.82% | ||
| KYCCF - CODAF | 0% Poorly correlated | -4.23% | ||
| HRIBF - CODAF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GWSO - CODAF | -0% Poorly correlated | +2.83% | ||
| JELLF - CODAF | -1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
GWSO and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that GWSO and KYCCF have been poorly correlated (+9% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GWSO and KYCCF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To GWSO | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GWSO | 100% | +2.83% | ||
| KYCCF - GWSO | 9% Poorly correlated | -4.23% | ||
| FCUV - GWSO | 8% Poorly correlated | -7.86% | ||
| HXGBY - GWSO | 3% Poorly correlated | -0.82% | ||
| CODAF - GWSO | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LCTC - GWSO | -1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||