Advertisement
CON vs LFST
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 CON is a StrongBuy and LFST is a StrongBuy.
| CON | LFST | CON / LFST | |
| Capitalization | 4.46B | 4.96B | 90% |
| EBITDA | 455M | 132M | 345% |
| Gain YTD | 78.837 | 84.233 | 94% |
| P/E Ratio | 22.55 | 99.81 | 23% |
| Revenue | 2.29B | 1.59B | 144% |
| Total Cash | 158M | 226M | 70% |
| Total Debt | 2.14B | 460M | 466% |
| CON | LFST | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 75% | 2 days ago 80% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 65% | 2 days ago 77% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 67% | 2 days ago 82% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 59% | 2 days ago 83% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 63% | 2 days ago 79% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 64% | 2 days ago 80% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 74% | 11 days ago 76% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 5 days ago 67% | 9 days ago 81% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 63% | 2 days ago 74% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 46% | 2 days ago 73% |
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 overvalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).
CON’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green while LFST’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- CON’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
- LFST’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.
CON’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while LFST’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).
- CON’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 3 bearish.
- LFST’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
CON (@Hospital/Nursing Management) experienced а +1.39% price change this week, while LFST (@Hospital/Nursing Management) price change was +1.89% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Hospital/Nursing Management industry was -0.85%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.79%, and the average quarterly price growth was +33.12%.
Reported Earning Dates
CON is expected to report earnings on Oct 29, 2026.
LFST is expected to report earnings on Nov 05, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Hospital/Nursing Management (-0.85% weekly)Hospital/Nursing Management companies own and operate health care facilities. Their operations include nursing homes, acute care facilities, retirement centers and outpatient surgery centers. HCA Healthcare Inc., Alcon Inc. and Universal Health Services, Inc. are some major companies in this industry. Technology has been at the forefront of development of advanced solutions, including quicker diagnoses of complex conditions. Investments in new diagnostics, healthcare IoT, and other healthcare technologies continue to gather momentum in this industry.
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| JDVI | 41.08 | 0.57 | +1.42% |
| JHancock Discp Val Intl Sel ETF | |||
| IWS | 167.00 | 1.27 | +0.77% |
| iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF | |||
| NAPR | 60.33 | 0.20 | +0.34% |
| Innovator Nasdaq-100 Pwr Bffr ETF Apr | |||
| QBUL | 24.09 | 0.05 | +0.22% |
| TrueShares Quarterly Bull Hedge ETF | |||
| MEM | 43.83 | N/A | N/A |
| Matthews Emerging Markets Eq Actv ETF | |||
CON and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CON has been loosely correlated with PNTG. These tickers have moved in lockstep 40% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CON jumps, then PNTG could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CON | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | 100% | +2.07% | ||
| PNTG - CON | 40% Loosely correlated | -0.25% | ||
| HCSG - CON | 36% Loosely correlated | +0.64% | ||
| ARDT - CON | 36% Loosely correlated | +0.73% | ||
| UHS - CON | 34% Loosely correlated | +1.22% | ||
| THC - CON | 33% Loosely correlated | +0.09% | ||
More | ||||
LFST and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, LFST has been loosely correlated with INNV. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if LFST jumps, then INNV could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LFST | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LFST | 100% | -0.23% | ||
| INNV - LFST | 35% Loosely correlated | +1.42% | ||
| AGL - LFST | 34% Loosely correlated | -3.06% | ||
| CON - LFST | 31% Poorly correlated | +2.07% | ||
| SGRY - LFST | 26% Poorly correlated | +1.84% | ||
| ENSG - LFST | 26% Poorly correlated | +0.69% | ||
More | ||||