Advertisement
DNACF vs EBYH
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 DNACF is a Hold and EBYH 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).
DNACF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileEBYH’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- DNACF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- EBYH’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
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.
DNACF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while EBYH’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- DNACF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
- EBYH’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
DNACF (@Industrial Conglomerates) experienced а -11.26% price change this week, while EBYH (@Services to the Health Industry) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Industrial Conglomerates industry was -0.57%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +3.98%, and the average quarterly price growth was +10.97%.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Services to the Health Industry industry was -2.30%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.52%, and the average quarterly price growth was +18.21%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Industrial Conglomerates (-0.57% weekly)Industrial Conglomerates specialize in numerous types of products, most of which comprise industrial goods, while some also go towards meeting household needs. Honeywell (makes engineering services and aerospace systems), United Technologies Corporation(manufactures aircraft engines, aerospace systems, HVAC, elevators and escalators, fire and security, building systems, and industrial products, among others), 3M (over 60,000 products under several world-renowned brands, including adhesives, abrasives, laminates, passive fire protection, personal protective equipment, window films, paint protection films, dental and orthodontic products, electrical & electronic connecting and insulating materials, medical products, car-care products, electronic circuits, healthcare software and optical films).
@Services to the Health Industry (-2.30% weekly)This industry comprises companies that provide services, such as equipment sterilization, research, physician management systems and consulting, that support the healthcare/medical industry. Examples of such companies include Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, which operates one of the largest clinical laboratory networks in the world; Quest Diagnostics Inc., which is a clinical laboratory; and Syneos Health, which is a major clinical research organization.
| DNACF | EBYH | DNACF / EBYH | |
| Capitalization | 1.7B | 2.35M | 72,244% |
| EBITDA | -24.36B | -461.74K | 5,275,673% |
| Gain YTD | -29.887 | -17.671 | 169% |
| P/E Ratio | 10.60 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 132B | 1.38K | 9,544,468,547% |
| Total Cash | 76.2B | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 44.4B | 38K | 116,842,105% |
DNACF | EBYH | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 99 | 30 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 30 Undervalued | 87 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 82 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 96 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 65 | 86 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 91 | 100 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 5 | 9 |
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.
DNACF's Valuation (30) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for EBYH (87). This means that DNACF’s stock grew somewhat faster than EBYH’s over the last 12 months.
EBYH's Profit vs Risk Rating (82) in the null industry is in the same range as DNACF (100). This means that EBYH’s stock grew similarly to DNACF’s over the last 12 months.
DNACF's SMR Rating (96) in the null industry is in the same range as EBYH (100). This means that DNACF’s stock grew similarly to EBYH’s over the last 12 months.
DNACF's Price Growth Rating (65) in the null industry is in the same range as EBYH (86). This means that DNACF’s stock grew similarly to EBYH’s over the last 12 months.
DNACF's P/E Growth Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as EBYH (100). This means that DNACF’s stock grew similarly to EBYH’s over the last 12 months.
| DNACF | EBYH | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 32% | 1 day ago 55% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 53% | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 37% | 1 day ago 63% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 44% | 1 day ago 45% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 42% | 1 day ago 52% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 35% | 1 day ago 68% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 73% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 40% | 1 day ago 51% |
Advertisement
DNACF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that DNACF and EXSPF have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that DNACF and EXSPF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To DNACF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNACF | 100% | +10.93% | ||
| EXSPF - DNACF | 32% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PSSWF - DNACF | 31% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| PANW - DNACF | 28% Poorly correlated | +1.10% | ||
| BAND - DNACF | 26% Poorly correlated | +0.19% | ||
| DAVA - DNACF | 26% Poorly correlated | +2.11% | ||
More | ||||
EBYH and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that EBYH and FBSFF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that EBYH and FBSFF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To EBYH | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EBYH | 100% | N/A | ||
| FBSFF - EBYH | 30% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| MRT - EBYH | 25% Poorly correlated | +0.84% | ||
| LVWD - EBYH | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| DGNOF - EBYH | 10% Poorly correlated | -2.43% | ||
| DNACF - EBYH | 8% Poorly correlated | +10.93% | ||
More | ||||