EIPAF vs GLPEF
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 EIPAF is a Hold and GLPEF 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).
EIPAF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileGLPEF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- EIPAF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- GLPEF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
EIPAF (@Integrated Oil) experienced а -1.98% price change this week, while GLPEF (@Integrated Oil) price change was -5.90% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Integrated Oil industry was -0.94%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -5.21%, and the average quarterly price growth was -9.84%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Integrated Oil (-0.94% weekly)Integrated oil companies are involved across nearly the entire oil value chain – from upstream operations like exploration and production, to downstream functions of refining and marketing. Exxon Mobil Corporation, Chevron Corporation and BP are major integrated oil companies. Their bottom lines’ response to crude oil prices could depend on the proportion of upstream vs. downstream businesses; for example, if a company has substantial downstream business, the adverse impact on their upstream business due to falling crude prices could be mitigated by benefits to its downstream business.
| EIPAF | GLPEF | EIPAF / GLPEF | |
| Capitalization | 50.5B | 10.9B | 463% |
| EBITDA | 37B | 5.1B | 725% |
| Gain YTD | 1.992 | 11.740 | 17% |
| P/E Ratio | 3.37 | 5.12 | 66% |
| Revenue | 128B | 26.3B | 487% |
| Total Cash | 19.1B | 2.23B | 856% |
| Total Debt | 31.8B | 4.69B | 679% |
EIPAF | GLPEF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 99 | 83 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 38 Fair valued | 39 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 91 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 82 | 32 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 72 | 64 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 17 | 44 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 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.
EIPAF's Valuation (38) in the null industry is in the same range as GLPEF (39). This means that EIPAF’s stock grew similarly to GLPEF’s over the last 12 months.
GLPEF's Profit vs Risk Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as EIPAF (100). This means that GLPEF’s stock grew similarly to EIPAF’s over the last 12 months.
GLPEF's SMR Rating (32) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for EIPAF (82). This means that GLPEF’s stock grew somewhat faster than EIPAF’s over the last 12 months.
GLPEF's Price Growth Rating (64) in the null industry is in the same range as EIPAF (72). This means that GLPEF’s stock grew similarly to EIPAF’s over the last 12 months.
EIPAF's P/E Growth Rating (17) in the null industry is in the same range as GLPEF (44). This means that EIPAF’s stock grew similarly to GLPEF’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 (%) |
EIPAF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that EIPAF and GLPEF have been poorly correlated (+5% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that EIPAF and GLPEF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To EIPAF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EIPAF | 100% | N/A | ||
| GLPEF - EIPAF | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BPAQF - EIPAF | 3% Poorly correlated | +1.16% | ||
| NFG - EIPAF | 1% Poorly correlated | -0.82% | ||
| SLNG - EIPAF | -4% Poorly correlated | -6.18% | ||
| TGS - EIPAF | -5% Poorly correlated | +6.03% | ||
More | ||||
GLPEF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that GLPEF and E have been poorly correlated (+13% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GLPEF and E's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To GLPEF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GLPEF | 100% | N/A | ||
| E - GLPEF | 13% Poorly correlated | +1.20% | ||
| NFG - GLPEF | 9% Poorly correlated | -0.82% | ||
| EC - GLPEF | 8% Poorly correlated | +5.03% | ||
| EQNR - GLPEF | 7% Poorly correlated | +4.50% | ||
| EIPAF - GLPEF | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||