DMZPY
Price
$5.57
Change
-$0.69 (-11.02%)
Updated
Aug 27 closing price
Capitalization
916.51M
GGGSF
Price
$21.78
Change
-$0.27 (-1.22%)
Updated
Aug 22 closing price
Capitalization
2.2B
Interact to see
Advertisement

DMZPY vs GGGSF

Header iconDMZPY vs GGGSF Comparison
Open Charts DMZPY vs GGGSFBanner chart's image
Domino's Pizza Australia New Zealand
Price$5.57
Change-$0.69 (-11.02%)
Volume$2.5K
Capitalization916.51M
Greggs
Price$21.78
Change-$0.27 (-1.22%)
Volume$414
Capitalization2.2B
DMZPY vs GGGSF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
DMZPY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GGGSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
DMZPY vs. GGGSF commentary
Aug 29, 2025

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 DMZPY is a Hold and GGGSF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 29, 2025
Stock price -- (DMZPY: $5.57 vs. GGGSF: $21.78)
Brand notoriety: DMZPY and GGGSF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Restaurants industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: DMZPY: 341% vs. GGGSF: 40%
Market capitalization -- DMZPY: $916.51M vs. GGGSF: $2.2B
DMZPY [@Restaurants] is valued at $916.51M. GGGSF’s [@Restaurants] market capitalization is $2.2B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Restaurants] industry ranges from $222.8B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Restaurants] industry is $8.02B.

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).

DMZPY’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileGGGSF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • DMZPY’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • GGGSF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, both DMZPY and GGGSF are a bad buy in the long-term.

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.

DMZPY’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GGGSF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • DMZPY’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • GGGSF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, GGGSF is a better buy in the short-term than DMZPY.

Price Growth

DMZPY (@Restaurants) experienced а -4.95% price change this week, while GGGSF (@Restaurants) price change was -1.21% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Restaurants industry was +1.05%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -5.28%, and the average quarterly price growth was -12.03%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Restaurants (+1.05% weekly)

The industry includes companies that operate full-service restaurants, fast food restaurants, cafeterias and snack bars. McDonald`s Corporation, Starbucks Corporation, YUM! Brands, Inc. and Restaurant Brands International Inc. are some of the largest U.S. restaurant-owning companies in terms of market capitalization. While restaurant spending could be viewed as discretionary for consumers, some companies in the business have been able to weather economic cycles by establishing strong loyalty among customers over the years. Many of them also have a strong global presence as well.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
GGGSF($2.2B) has a higher market cap than DMZPY($917M). DMZPY has higher P/E ratio than GGGSF: DMZPY (139.34) vs GGGSF (11.45). GGGSF YTD gains are higher at: -36.793 vs. DMZPY (-38.986). GGGSF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 359M vs. DMZPY (195M). DMZPY has higher revenues than GGGSF: DMZPY (2.26B) vs GGGSF (2.08B).
DMZPYGGGSFDMZPY / GGGSF
Capitalization917M2.2B42%
EBITDA195M359M54%
Gain YTD-38.986-36.793106%
P/E Ratio139.3411.451,217%
Revenue2.26B2.08B109%
Total CashN/A32.5M-
Total DebtN/A451M-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
DMZPY vs GGGSF: Fundamental Ratings
DMZPY
GGGSF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
2322
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
17
Undervalued
11
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10090
SMR RATING
1..100
9136
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8283
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
393
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a50

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.

GGGSF's Valuation (11) in the null industry is in the same range as DMZPY (17). This means that GGGSF’s stock grew similarly to DMZPY’s over the last 12 months.

GGGSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (90) in the null industry is in the same range as DMZPY (100). This means that GGGSF’s stock grew similarly to DMZPY’s over the last 12 months.

GGGSF's SMR Rating (36) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for DMZPY (91). This means that GGGSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than DMZPY’s over the last 12 months.

DMZPY's Price Growth Rating (82) in the null industry is in the same range as GGGSF (83). This means that DMZPY’s stock grew similarly to GGGSF’s over the last 12 months.

DMZPY's P/E Growth Rating (3) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for GGGSF (93). This means that DMZPY’s stock grew significantly faster than GGGSF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
DMZPYGGGSF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
20%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
35%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
17%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
53%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
64%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
56%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
17%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
55%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
54%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
51%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
37%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
63%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
50%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
36%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
DMZPY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GGGSF
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 %
CTIGX16.540.04
+0.24%
Calamos Timpani SMID Growth I
TIHGX93.50N/A
N/A
The Investment House Growth
JHUJX35.56N/A
N/A
JPMorgan Emerging Markets Equity R2
USRTX33.40N/A
N/A
Horizon Multi-Factor U.S. Equity Advisor
TRZNX19.46N/A
N/A
T. Rowe Price New Asia Z

DMZPY and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that DMZPY and KRUS have been poorly correlated (+5% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that DMZPY and KRUS's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To DMZPY
1D Price
Change %
DMZPY100%
-11.09%
KRUS - DMZPY
5%
Poorly correlated
+1.59%
DPUKY - DMZPY
5%
Poorly correlated
-4.12%
DPZUF - DMZPY
2%
Poorly correlated
-14.35%
GGGSF - DMZPY
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CMPGF - DMZPY
0%
Poorly correlated
-2.31%
More

GGGSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GGGSF and KRIUF have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GGGSF and KRIUF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GGGSF
1D Price
Change %
GGGSF100%
N/A
KRIUF - GGGSF
31%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HLFFF - GGGSF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
JBFCF - GGGSF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
DMPZF - GGGSF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
DPZUF - GGGSF
0%
Poorly correlated
-14.35%
More