COST
Price
$954.40
Change
+$8.62 (+0.91%)
Updated
Apr 1 closing price
Capitalization
423.45B
58 days until earnings call
DLMAF
Price
$107.00
Change
+$0.56 (+0.53%)
Updated
Mar 31 closing price
Capitalization
30.19B
Ad is loading...

COST vs DLMAF

Header iconCOST vs DLMAF Comparison
Open Charts COST vs DLMAFBanner chart's image
Costco Wholesale
Price$954.40
Change+$8.62 (+0.91%)
Volume$2.04M
Capitalization423.45B
Dollarama
Price$107.00
Change+$0.56 (+0.53%)
Volume$10.86K
Capitalization30.19B
COST vs DLMAF Comparison Chart
Loading...
COST
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
COST vs. DLMAF commentary
Apr 02, 2025

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 COST is a Buy and DLMAF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Apr 02, 2025
Stock price -- (COST: $954.40 vs. DLMAF: $107.00)
Brand notoriety: COST: Notable vs. DLMAF: Not notable
Both companies represent the Discount Stores industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: COST: 90% vs. DLMAF: 16%
Market capitalization -- COST: $423.45B vs. DLMAF: $30.19B
COST [@Discount Stores] is valued at $423.45B. DLMAF’s [@Discount Stores] market capitalization is $30.19B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Discount Stores] industry ranges from $712.14B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Discount Stores] industry is $84.73B.

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).

COST’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileDLMAF’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

  • COST’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
  • DLMAF’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
According to our system of comparison, DLMAF is a better buy in the long-term than COST.

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.

COST’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • COST’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.

Price Growth

COST (@Discount Stores) experienced а +2.59% price change this week, while DLMAF (@Discount Stores) price change was +2.74% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Discount Stores industry was +3.15%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.86%, and the average quarterly price growth was -5.36%.

Reported Earning Dates

COST is expected to report earnings on May 30, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Discount Stores (+3.15% weekly)

Companies in the discount stores industry specialize in offering substantial discounts on a vast array of retail products. Some companies in this industry also operate general merchandise warehouse clubs. Products sold at discount stores are typically similar to those of any department store, but the pricing of the goods is generally much lower (and hence the name “discount”). Think Dollar General Corporation, Dollar Tree, Inc. and Five Below, Inc. Many discount stores target low-income households and/or price-sensitive consumers as their potential market. Discount stores’ profitability could hinge on factors like competitive pricing, sufficient locations, healthy revenue per square foot, and effective advertisement. These store operators could have an edge over other retailers during financial crises or recessions, when many consumers could be looking for less expensive alternatives.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
COST($423B) has a higher market cap than DLMAF($30.2B). COST has higher P/E ratio than DLMAF: COST (55.72) vs DLMAF (39.19). DLMAF YTD gains are higher at: 10.892 vs. COST (4.277). COST has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 12.6B vs. DLMAF (2.04B). COST has more cash in the bank: 13.2B vs. DLMAF (283M). DLMAF has less debt than COST: DLMAF (4.66B) vs COST (8.04B). COST has higher revenues than DLMAF: COST (264B) vs DLMAF (6.17B).
COSTDLMAFCOST / DLMAF
Capitalization423B30.2B1,401%
EBITDA12.6B2.04B619%
Gain YTD4.27710.89239%
P/E Ratio55.7239.19142%
Revenue264B6.17B4,278%
Total Cash13.2B283M4,664%
Total Debt8.04B4.66B173%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
COST vs DLMAF: Fundamental Ratings
COST
DLMAF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
821
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
96
Overvalued
92
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
42
SMR RATING
1..100
3112
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5344
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3121
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/a

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.

DLMAF's Valuation (92) in the null industry is in the same range as COST (96) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that DLMAF’s stock grew similarly to COST’s over the last 12 months.

DLMAF's Profit vs Risk Rating (2) in the null industry is in the same range as COST (4) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that DLMAF’s stock grew similarly to COST’s over the last 12 months.

DLMAF's SMR Rating (12) in the null industry is in the same range as COST (31) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that DLMAF’s stock grew similarly to COST’s over the last 12 months.

DLMAF's Price Growth Rating (44) in the null industry is in the same range as COST (53) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that DLMAF’s stock grew similarly to COST’s over the last 12 months.

DLMAF's P/E Growth Rating (21) in the null industry is in the same range as COST (31) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that DLMAF’s stock grew similarly to COST’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
COST
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
89%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
33%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
63%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
72%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
68%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
35%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 8 days ago
67%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 20 days ago
37%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
46%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
COST
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
LAES2.730.13
+5.00%
SEALSQ Corp
SLM29.620.25
+0.85%
SLM Corp
PRU111.690.01
+0.01%
Prudential Financial
HUIZ2.61-0.01
-0.38%
Huize Holding Limited
OCUL6.54-0.79
-10.78%
Ocular Therapeutix

DLMAF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that DLMAF and OLLI have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that DLMAF and OLLI's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To DLMAF
1D Price
Change %
DLMAF100%
+0.53%
OLLI - DLMAF
26%
Poorly correlated
+2.76%
COST - DLMAF
20%
Poorly correlated
+1.73%
WMT - DLMAF
18%
Poorly correlated
+3.10%
BMRRY - DLMAF
15%
Poorly correlated
-2.57%
WMMVY - DLMAF
13%
Poorly correlated
-1.47%
More