EFSG vs MTPOY
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 EFSG is a Hold and MTPOY 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).
EFSG’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileMTPOY’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- EFSG’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- MTPOY’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 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.
EFSG’s TA Score shows that 0 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- EFSG’s TA Score: 0 bullish, 1 bearish.
Price Growth
EFSG (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MTPOY (@Regional Banks) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +3.11%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.42%, and the average quarterly price growth was +11.25%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (+3.11% 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.
| EFSG | MTPOY | EFSG / MTPOY | |
| Capitalization | 16.3M | 4.8B | 0% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 0.000 | 0.000 | - |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | 7.91 | - |
| Revenue | N/A | 118B | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 102B | - |
EFSG | MTPOY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 7 Undervalued | 40 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 24 | 29 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 65 | 1 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 52 | 38 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 81 | 46 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 85 | 30 |
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.
EFSG's Valuation (7) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MTPOY (40). This means that EFSG’s stock grew somewhat faster than MTPOY’s over the last 12 months.
EFSG's Profit vs Risk Rating (24) in the null industry is in the same range as MTPOY (29). This means that EFSG’s stock grew similarly to MTPOY’s over the last 12 months.
MTPOY's SMR Rating (1) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for EFSG (65). This means that MTPOY’s stock grew somewhat faster than EFSG’s over the last 12 months.
MTPOY's Price Growth Rating (38) in the null industry is in the same range as EFSG (52). This means that MTPOY’s stock grew similarly to EFSG’s over the last 12 months.
MTPOY's P/E Growth Rating (46) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for EFSG (81). This means that MTPOY’s stock grew somewhat faster than EFSG’s over the last 12 months.
| EFSG | MTPOY | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 12 days ago 32% | 12 days ago 22% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 12 days ago 31% | 12 days ago 24% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 12 days ago 34% | N/A |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| MFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| DDFRX | 18.54 | 0.15 | +0.82% |
| Invesco Diversified Dividend R | |||
| BGIUX | 13.45 | 0.08 | +0.60% |
| Baillie Gifford International Alpha 4 | |||
| TEFQX | 3.86 | 0.02 | +0.52% |
| Firsthand Technology Opportunities | |||
| MAIPX | 15.30 | 0.04 | +0.26% |
| MAI Managed Volatility Institutional | |||
| STVYX | 17.21 | 0.03 | +0.17% |
| SEI Tax-Managed Mgd Volatility Y (SIMT) | |||
EFSG and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that EFSG and BDOUF have been poorly correlated (+32% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that EFSG and BDOUF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To EFSG | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EFSG | 100% | N/A | ||
| BDOUF - EFSG | 32% Poorly correlated | -10.83% | ||
| MTPOY - EFSG | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| JUVF - EFSG | 21% Poorly correlated | +3.21% |
MTPOY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MTPOY has been loosely correlated with BQCNF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 61% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MTPOY jumps, then BQCNF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MTPOY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MTPOY | 100% | N/A | ||
| BQCNF - MTPOY | 61% Loosely correlated | N/A | ||
| EDVR - MTPOY | 26% Poorly correlated | +0.62% | ||
| HCKG - MTPOY | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BBAJF - MTPOY | 23% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| EFSG - MTPOY | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||