CXXIF vs ECGS
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 CXXIF is a Hold and ECGS 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).
CXXIF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileECGS’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- CXXIF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- ECGS’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
CXXIF (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) experienced а +26.17% price change this week, while ECGS (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) price change was -14.29% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pharmaceuticals: Other industry was -5.07%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -7.87%, and the average quarterly price growth was -11.90%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pharmaceuticals: Other (-5.07% weekly)Pharmaceuticals (Other) comprise companies that are involved in the discovery, development or manufacturing of therapeutic and preventative medicines. They often collaborate with or acquire other pharmaceutical/healthcare firms. Examples of companies in this segment include Bausch Health Companies Inc., Icon Plc and Perrigo Company Plc.
| CXXIF | ECGS | CXXIF / ECGS | |
| Capitalization | 36.2M | N/A | - |
| EBITDA | 5.53M | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -17.717 | -45.455 | 39% |
| P/E Ratio | 28.99 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 29.1M | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | 1.83M | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 11M | N/A | - |
CXXIF | ECGS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 100 Overvalued | 45 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 87 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 85 | 95 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 7 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 95 | 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.
ECGS's Valuation (45) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CXXIF (100). This means that ECGS’s stock grew somewhat faster than CXXIF’s over the last 12 months.
ECGS's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as CXXIF (100). This means that ECGS’s stock grew similarly to CXXIF’s over the last 12 months.
CXXIF's SMR Rating (87) in the null industry is in the same range as ECGS (100). This means that CXXIF’s stock grew similarly to ECGS’s over the last 12 months.
CXXIF's Price Growth Rating (85) in the null industry is in the same range as ECGS (95). This means that CXXIF’s stock grew similarly to ECGS’s over the last 12 months.
CXXIF's P/E Growth Rating (7) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for ECGS (100). This means that CXXIF’s stock grew significantly faster than ECGS’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 (%) |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| MFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| DMSFX | 10.58 | -0.03 | -0.28% |
| Destinations Multi Strategy Alts I | |||
| FASMX | 20.96 | -0.14 | -0.66% |
| Fidelity Asset Manager 50% | |||
| SRUAX | 14.93 | -0.17 | -1.13% |
| Meeder Spectrum Adviser | |||
| NSRIX | 24.15 | -0.31 | -1.27% |
| Northern Global Sustainability Index I | |||
| SLGCX | 11.56 | -0.23 | -1.95% |
| Saratoga Large Capitalization Growth C | |||
CXXIF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CXXIF has been loosely correlated with GTBIF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 54% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CXXIF jumps, then GTBIF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To CXXIF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CXXIF | 100% | +1.11% | ||
| GTBIF - CXXIF | 54% Loosely correlated | +3.42% | ||
| TCNNF - CXXIF | 53% Loosely correlated | +3.50% | ||
| VRNOF - CXXIF | 52% Loosely correlated | -3.93% | ||
| TSNDF - CXXIF | 52% Loosely correlated | +4.59% | ||
| AYRWF - CXXIF | 49% Loosely correlated | -1.28% | ||
More | ||||
ECGS and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that ECGS and ELTP have been poorly correlated (+15% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that ECGS and ELTP's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To ECGS | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECGS | 100% | +20.00% | ||
| ELTP - ECGS | 15% Poorly correlated | +8.46% | ||
| GRUSF - ECGS | 14% Poorly correlated | +0.71% | ||
| CURLF - ECGS | 8% Poorly correlated | +0.91% | ||
| CXXIF - ECGS | 7% Poorly correlated | +1.11% | ||
| CTTH - ECGS | 7% Poorly correlated | -8.57% | ||
More | ||||