CZFS
Price
$64.86
Change
+$2.29 (+3.66%)
Updated
Dec 19, 04:59 PM (EDT)
35 days until earnings call
RBCAA
Price
$70.57
Change
+$0.07 (+0.10%)
Updated
Dec 19, 04:59 PM (EDT)
36 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

CZFS vs RBCAA

Header iconCZFS vs RBCAA Comparison
Open Charts CZFS vs RBCAABanner chart's image
Citizens Financial Services
Price$64.86
Change+$2.29 (+3.66%)
Volume$536
CapitalizationN/A
Republic Ban
Price$70.57
Change+$0.07 (+0.10%)
Volume$100
CapitalizationN/A
CZFS vs RBCAA Comparison Chart
Loading...
CZFS
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RBCAA
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CZFS vs. RBCAA commentary
Dec 20, 2024

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 CZFS is a Hold and RBCAA is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 20, 2024
Stock price -- (CZFS: $62.57 vs. RBCAA: $70.50)
Brand notoriety: CZFS and RBCAA are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CZFS: 97% vs. RBCAA: 102%
Market capitalization -- CZFS: $231.58M vs. RBCAA: $954.62M
CZFS [@Regional Banks] is valued at $231.58M. RBCAA’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $954.62M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $5.88B.

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).

CZFS’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileRBCAA’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).

  • CZFS’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • RBCAA’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 red.
According to our system of comparison, RBCAA is a better buy in the long-term than CZFS.

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.

CZFS’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while RBCAA’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • CZFS’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
  • RBCAA’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, RBCAA is a better buy in the short-term than CZFS.

Price Growth

CZFS (@Regional Banks) experienced а -11.63% price change this week, while RBCAA (@Regional Banks) price change was -8.41% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -3.01%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.26%, and the average quarterly price growth was +19.49%.

Reported Earning Dates

CZFS is expected to report earnings on Jan 23, 2025.

RBCAA is expected to report earnings on Jan 24, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (-3.01% weekly)

Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RBCAA($955M) has a higher market cap than CZFS($232M). CZFS has higher P/E ratio than RBCAA: CZFS (11.92) vs RBCAA (10.65). RBCAA YTD gains are higher at: 30.692 vs. CZFS (2.720). CZFS has less debt than RBCAA: CZFS (322M) vs RBCAA (416M). RBCAA has higher revenues than CZFS: RBCAA (354M) vs CZFS (91.9M).
CZFSRBCAACZFS / RBCAA
Capitalization232M955M24%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD2.72030.6929%
P/E Ratio11.9210.65112%
Revenue91.9M354M26%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt322M416M77%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CZFS vs RBCAA: Fundamental Ratings
CZFS
RBCAA
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5974
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
58
Fair valued
82
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
5416
SMR RATING
1..100
3515
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4041
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
6829
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
23n/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.

CZFS's Valuation (58) in the null industry is in the same range as RBCAA (82) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that CZFS’s stock grew similarly to RBCAA’s over the last 12 months.

RBCAA's Profit vs Risk Rating (16) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CZFS (54) in the null industry. This means that RBCAA’s stock grew somewhat faster than CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

RBCAA's SMR Rating (15) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as CZFS (35) in the null industry. This means that RBCAA’s stock grew similarly to CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

CZFS's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as RBCAA (41) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that CZFS’s stock grew similarly to RBCAA’s over the last 12 months.

RBCAA's P/E Growth Rating (29) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for CZFS (68) in the null industry. This means that RBCAA’s stock grew somewhat faster than CZFS’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CZFSRBCAA
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
50%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
48%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
70%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
39%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
49%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
44%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
56%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
47%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
58%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
49%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
58%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 25 days ago
66%
Bullish Trend 9 days ago
62%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
63%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
55%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
48%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
58%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
62%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
CZFS
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
RBCAA
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
INKDX20.25N/A
N/A
Pioneer Disciplined Growth K
ACEKX10.37-0.21
-1.98%
Invesco Equity and Income R5
QCBGX20.70-0.49
-2.31%
Federated Hermes MDT Balanced C
STPAX20.84-0.65
-3.02%
Saratoga Technology & Comm A
CCSGX26.60-0.97
-3.52%
Conestoga SMid Cap Institutional

RBCAA and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, RBCAA has been closely correlated with THFF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 89% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if RBCAA jumps, then THFF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RBCAA
1D Price
Change %
RBCAA100%
-6.11%
THFF - RBCAA
89%
Closely correlated
-5.39%
FCBC - RBCAA
87%
Closely correlated
-6.78%
BUSE - RBCAA
85%
Closely correlated
-5.64%
GSBC - RBCAA
84%
Closely correlated
-4.62%
TRST - RBCAA
84%
Closely correlated
-5.72%
More