CTUNF vs GRGSF
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 CTUNF is a Hold and GRGSF 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).
CTUNF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGRGSF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CTUNF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- GRGSF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CTUNF (@Agricultural Commodities/Milling) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while GRGSF (@Agricultural Commodities/Milling) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Agricultural Commodities/Milling industry was -1.08%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.99%, and the average quarterly price growth was -8.44%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Agricultural Commodities/Milling (-1.08% weekly)The Agricultural Commodities/Milling industry includes companies that are involved in farming activities, such as crop production, livestock management and animal feed, for commercial purposes. The industry includes a wide range of operations from growing corn, to grain and oilseed processing to the operation of flour mills. Changes in consumer tastes is one of the critical factors influencing what products are grown and raised in this industry. Potential risks to the business include climate change and fluctuations in global prices of agricultural products. Archer-Daniels-Midland Company, Elanco Animal Health, Inc., Bunge Limited and Canopy Growth Corporation are some of the biggest U.S. companies operating in this industry.
| CTUNF | GRGSF | CTUNF / GRGSF | |
| Capitalization | 54.6M | 803M | 7% |
| EBITDA | 11.4M | 1.78B | 1% |
| Gain YTD | -6.667 | -5.847 | 114% |
| P/E Ratio | 10.08 | 8.49 | 119% |
| Revenue | 69.2M | 7.25B | 1% |
| Total Cash | 30.1M | 1.27B | 2% |
| Total Debt | 23M | 3.79B | 1% |
CTUNF | GRGSF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 39 | 47 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 66 Overvalued | 37 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 70 | 92 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 82 | 55 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 37 | 2 | |
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.
GRGSF's Valuation (37) in the null industry is in the same range as CTUNF (66). This means that GRGSF’s stock grew similarly to CTUNF’s over the last 12 months.
GRGSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as CTUNF (100). This means that GRGSF’s stock grew similarly to CTUNF’s over the last 12 months.
CTUNF's SMR Rating (70) in the null industry is in the same range as GRGSF (92). This means that CTUNF’s stock grew similarly to GRGSF’s over the last 12 months.
GRGSF's Price Growth Rating (55) in the null industry is in the same range as CTUNF (82). This means that GRGSF’s stock grew similarly to CTUNF’s over the last 12 months.
GRGSF's P/E Growth Rating (2) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CTUNF (37). This means that GRGSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than CTUNF’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 (%) |
CTUNF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CTUNF and AGRO have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CTUNF and AGRO's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CTUNF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTUNF | 100% | N/A | ||
| AGRO - CTUNF | 30% Poorly correlated | +0.27% | ||
| EDESY - CTUNF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GSFD - CTUNF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GLGLF - CTUNF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GRGSF - CTUNF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
GRGSF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that GRGSF and GRCLF have been poorly correlated (+0% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GRGSF and GRCLF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To GRGSF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GRGSF | 100% | N/A | ||
| GRCLF - GRGSF | 0% Poorly correlated | +4.00% | ||
| EDESY - GRGSF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| GARPY - GRGSF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CTUNF - GRGSF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| HERB - GRGSF | -1% Poorly correlated | -7.14% | ||
More | ||||