COST vs WMMVF
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 WMMVF 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).
COST’s FA Score shows that 3 FA rating(s) are green whileWMMVF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- COST’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
- WMMVF’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.
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 +3.02% price change this week, while WMMVF (@Discount Stores) price change was +5.52% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Discount Stores industry was +3.22%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +8.62%, and the average quarterly price growth was -4.61%.
Reported Earning Dates
COST is expected to report earnings on May 30, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Discount Stores (+3.22% 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.
| COST | WMMVF | COST / WMMVF | |
| Capitalization | 429B | 49.6B | 865% |
| EBITDA | 12.6B | 91.6B | 14% |
| Gain YTD | 5.662 | 16.538 | 34% |
| P/E Ratio | 56.46 | 19.94 | 283% |
| Revenue | 264B | 959B | 28% |
| Total Cash | 13.2B | 36.5B | 36% |
| Total Debt | 8.04B | 79.7B | 10% |
COST | WMMVF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 12 | 29 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 96 Overvalued | 24 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 4 | 82 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 31 | 39 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 47 | 58 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 24 | 59 | |
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.
WMMVF's Valuation (24) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for COST (96) in the Specialty Stores industry. This means that WMMVF’s stock grew significantly faster than COST’s over the last 12 months.
COST's Profit vs Risk Rating (4) in the Specialty Stores industry is significantly better than the same rating for WMMVF (82) in the null industry. This means that COST’s stock grew significantly faster than WMMVF’s over the last 12 months.
COST's SMR Rating (31) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as WMMVF (39) in the null industry. This means that COST’s stock grew similarly to WMMVF’s over the last 12 months.
COST's Price Growth Rating (47) in the Specialty Stores industry is in the same range as WMMVF (58) in the null industry. This means that COST’s stock grew similarly to WMMVF’s over the last 12 months.
COST's P/E Growth Rating (24) in the Specialty Stores industry is somewhat better than the same rating for WMMVF (59) in the null industry. This means that COST’s stock grew somewhat faster than WMMVF’s over the last 12 months.
| COST | |
|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 83% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 32% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 65% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 67% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 68% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 35% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 66% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 23 days ago 37% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 70% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 44% |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| HELX | 27.03 | N/A | N/A |
| Franklin Genomic Advancements ETF | |||
| DAPR | 35.98 | -1.53 | -4.08% |
| FT Vest US Equity Dp Bffr ETF Apr | |||
| IUS | 47.55 | -2.15 | -4.33% |
| Invesco RAFI™ Strategic US ETF | |||
| PAMC | 40.83 | -2.35 | -5.45% |
| Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alt ETF | |||
| FV | 52.64 | -3.18 | -5.70% |
| First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF | |||
COST and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, COST has been loosely correlated with WMT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 55% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if COST jumps, then WMT could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To COST | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COST | 100% | +0.21% | ||
| WMT - COST | 55% Loosely correlated | -2.79% | ||
| OLLI - COST | 30% Poorly correlated | -0.63% | ||
| BJ - COST | 27% Poorly correlated | +3.06% | ||
| PSMT - COST | 24% Poorly correlated | -2.62% | ||
| DLMAF - COST | 20% Poorly correlated | +3.30% | ||
More | ||||
WMMVF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, WMMVF has been loosely correlated with WMMVY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 59% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if WMMVF jumps, then WMMVY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To WMMVF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WMMVF | 100% | +9.78% | ||
| WMMVY - WMMVF | 59% Loosely correlated | +5.88% | ||
| BMRPF - WMMVF | 20% Poorly correlated | +1.02% | ||
| COST - WMMVF | 17% Poorly correlated | +0.21% | ||
| OLLI - WMMVF | 16% Poorly correlated | -0.63% | ||
| BMRRY - WMMVF | 15% Poorly correlated | +2.16% | ||
More | ||||