CWLPF vs IGPPF
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 CWLPF is a Hold and IGPPF 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).
CWLPF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileIGPPF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- CWLPF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- IGPPF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
CWLPF (@Personnel Services) experienced а -3.64% price change this week, while IGPPF (@Personnel Services) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Personnel Services industry was +1.15%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +5.40%, and the average quarterly price growth was -5.37%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Personnel Services (+1.15% weekly)Personnel Services comprise companies that provide staffing and human resources management solutions for businesses. Each company might be involved in one or more types of recruitment or employee solutions such as permanent or temporary staffing, career consulting, outsourcing, administrative services and many more. Some personnel services companies cater to large businesses, while some specialize in providing services to small/medium-sized organizations. These specialized services potentially expedite the process of getting the ‘right’ candidates and/or training them to meet the requirements of a business process. Some of the companies also cover other critical areas like internal auditing for a company. Robert Half International Inc., ManpowerGroup Inc. and Insperity, Inc. are examples of companies in the personnel services industry.
| CWLPF | IGPPF | CWLPF / IGPPF | |
| Capitalization | 16.6M | 412M | 4% |
| EBITDA | 11.9M | 49.2M | 24% |
| Gain YTD | 33.838 | 18.590 | 182% |
| P/E Ratio | 4.14 | 22.32 | 19% |
| Revenue | 162M | 2.45B | 7% |
| Total Cash | 16.3M | 127M | 13% |
| Total Debt | 5.31M | 118M | 4% |
CWLPF | IGPPF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 30 | 48 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 49 Fair valued | 64 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 24 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 40 | 79 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 42 | 54 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 91 | 60 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 27 | 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.
CWLPF's Valuation (49) in the null industry is in the same range as IGPPF (64). This means that CWLPF’s stock grew similarly to IGPPF’s over the last 12 months.
IGPPF's Profit vs Risk Rating (24) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for CWLPF (100). This means that IGPPF’s stock grew significantly faster than CWLPF’s over the last 12 months.
CWLPF's SMR Rating (40) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for IGPPF (79). This means that CWLPF’s stock grew somewhat faster than IGPPF’s over the last 12 months.
CWLPF's Price Growth Rating (42) in the null industry is in the same range as IGPPF (54). This means that CWLPF’s stock grew similarly to IGPPF’s over the last 12 months.
IGPPF's P/E Growth Rating (60) in the null industry is in the same range as CWLPF (91). This means that IGPPF’s stock grew similarly to CWLPF’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 (%) |
CWLPF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that CWLPF and RANJF have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CWLPF and RANJF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CWLPF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CWLPF | 100% | N/A | ||
| RANJF - CWLPF | 26% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| RANJY - CWLPF | 7% Poorly correlated | +2.60% | ||
| RLBY - CWLPF | 3% Poorly correlated | -9.18% | ||
| HAYPY - CWLPF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| IGPPF - CWLPF | -0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
IGPPF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that IGPPF and FTRS have been poorly correlated (+17% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that IGPPF and FTRS's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To IGPPF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IGPPF | 100% | N/A | ||
| FTRS - IGPPF | 17% Poorly correlated | +27.66% | ||
| KELYB - IGPPF | 16% Poorly correlated | +1.93% | ||
| IPDN - IGPPF | 6% Poorly correlated | -0.12% | ||
| AHEXY - IGPPF | 6% Poorly correlated | +1.70% | ||
| BGSF - IGPPF | 5% Poorly correlated | +1.36% | ||
More | ||||