CTTOF vs MFGHF
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 CTTOF is a Hold and MFGHF 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).
CTTOF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileMFGHF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CTTOF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- MFGHF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CTTOF (@Air Freight/Couriers) experienced а +17.27% price change this week, while MFGHF (@Air Freight/Couriers) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Air Freight/Couriers industry was -1.02%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.78%, and the average quarterly price growth was +13.81%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Air Freight/Couriers (-1.02% weekly)The Air Freight/Couriers industry operates air transportation and recurring delivery services. This includes companies offering same-day deliveries, scheduled delivery and logistical services. The proliferation of e-commerce/online retail with a growing emphasis on faster delivery has expanded opportunities for this industry, and induced more competition. United Parcel Service, Inc., FedEx Corporation and Expeditors International of Washington, Inc. are some of the major companies in this industry.
| CTTOF | MFGHF | CTTOF / MFGHF | |
| Capitalization | 564M | 4.21B | 13% |
| EBITDA | 75.3M | 831M | 9% |
| Gain YTD | 65.208 | 0.379 | 17,222% |
| P/E Ratio | 10.83 | 17.24 | 63% |
| Revenue | 896M | 5.95B | 15% |
| Total Cash | 1.04B | 140M | 744% |
| Total Debt | 3.01B | 827M | 364% |
CTTOF | MFGHF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 37 Fair valued | 61 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 33 | 60 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 42 | 87 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 35 | 72 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 9 | 7 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | n/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.
CTTOF's Valuation (37) in the null industry is in the same range as MFGHF (61). This means that CTTOF’s stock grew similarly to MFGHF’s over the last 12 months.
CTTOF's Profit vs Risk Rating (33) in the null industry is in the same range as MFGHF (60). This means that CTTOF’s stock grew similarly to MFGHF’s over the last 12 months.
CTTOF's SMR Rating (42) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MFGHF (87). This means that CTTOF’s stock grew somewhat faster than MFGHF’s over the last 12 months.
CTTOF's Price Growth Rating (35) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MFGHF (72). This means that CTTOF’s stock grew somewhat faster than MFGHF’s over the last 12 months.
MFGHF's P/E Growth Rating (7) in the null industry is in the same range as CTTOF (9). This means that MFGHF’s stock grew similarly to CTTOF’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 (%) |
CTTOF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CTTOF and JANL have been poorly correlated (+4% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CTTOF and JANL's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CTTOF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTTOF | 100% | +17.27% | ||
| JANL - CTTOF | 4% Poorly correlated | +2.84% | ||
| DPSTF - CTTOF | 4% Poorly correlated | +0.95% | ||
| OSTIY - CTTOF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| MFGHF - CTTOF | -1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| KHNGF - CTTOF | -1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
MFGHF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that MFGHF and KHNGF have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MFGHF and KHNGF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MFGHF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MFGHF | 100% | N/A | ||
| KHNGF - MFGHF | 26% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| DPSTF - MFGHF | 5% Poorly correlated | +0.95% | ||
| KHNGY - MFGHF | 1% Poorly correlated | -0.57% | ||
| OSTIY - MFGHF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CTTOF - MFGHF | -1% Poorly correlated | +17.27% | ||
More | ||||