Ad is loading...
FATBB
Price
$4.65
Change
-$0.07 (-1.48%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
GTIM
Price
$2.72
Change
+$0.01 (+0.37%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
25 days until earnings call
Ad is loading...

FATBB vs GTIM

Header iconFATBB vs GTIM Comparison
Open Charts FATBB vs GTIMBanner chart's image
FAT Brands
Price$4.65
Change-$0.07 (-1.48%)
Volume$2.37K
CapitalizationN/A
Good Times Restaurants
Price$2.72
Change+$0.01 (+0.37%)
Volume$6.55K
CapitalizationN/A
FATBB vs GTIM Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
FATBB vs. GTIM commentary
Nov 18, 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 FATBB is a Sell and GTIM is a Sell.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (FATBB: $4.65 vs. GTIM: $2.72)
Brand notoriety: FATBB and GTIM are both not notable
Both companies represent the Restaurants industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: FATBB: 30% vs. GTIM: 57%
Market capitalization -- FATBB: $89.68M vs. GTIM: $29.25M
FATBB [@Restaurants] is valued at $89.68M. GTIM’s [@Restaurants] market capitalization is $29.25M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Restaurants] industry ranges from $209.7B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Restaurants] industry is $8.06B.

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).

FATBB’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileGTIM’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • FATBB’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • GTIM’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, GTIM is a better buy in the long-term than FATBB.

Price Growth

FATBB (@Restaurants) experienced а +3.06% price change this week, while GTIM (@Restaurants) price change was -1.81% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Restaurants industry was -0.48%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +10.00%, and the average quarterly price growth was +32.32%.

Reported Earning Dates

FATBB is expected to report earnings on May 09, 2023.

GTIM is expected to report earnings on Jan 30, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Restaurants (-0.48% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
FATBB($89.7M) has a higher market cap than GTIM($29.2M). GTIM YTD gains are higher at: 7.087 vs. FATBB (-6.429). FATBB has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 26.1M vs. GTIM (4.92M). FATBB has more cash in the bank: 16.6M vs. GTIM (4.82M). GTIM has less debt than FATBB: GTIM (46.6M) vs FATBB (1.44B). FATBB has higher revenues than GTIM: FATBB (606M) vs GTIM (141M).
FATBBGTIMFATBB / GTIM
Capitalization89.7M29.2M307%
EBITDA26.1M4.92M531%
Gain YTD-6.4297.087-91%
P/E RatioN/A27.20-
Revenue606M141M430%
Total Cash16.6M4.82M344%
Total Debt1.44B46.6M3,086%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GTIM: Fundamental Ratings
GTIM
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
17
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
62
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
73
SMR RATING
1..100
82
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
55
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
2
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
27

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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
HUDI1.960.05
+2.62%
Huadi International Group Co Ltd
ROK286.15-0.28
-0.10%
Rockwell Automation
FSBW46.47-0.16
-0.34%
FS Bancorp
PRGO26.81-0.12
-0.45%
Perrigo Company PLC
NRDS13.88-0.68
-4.67%
NerdWallet

FATBB and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FATBB has been loosely correlated with FAT. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FATBB jumps, then FAT could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FATBB
1D Price
Change %
FATBB100%
+1.53%
FAT - FATBB
36%
Loosely correlated
-1.31%
GTIM - FATBB
22%
Poorly correlated
+0.37%
SHAK - FATBB
21%
Poorly correlated
-2.05%
PBPB - FATBB
20%
Poorly correlated
-1.65%
CNNE - FATBB
13%
Poorly correlated
-0.69%
More

GTIM and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GTIM and FRSH have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GTIM and FRSH's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GTIM
1D Price
Change %
GTIM100%
+0.37%
FRSH - GTIM
25%
Poorly correlated
-3.62%
BDL - GTIM
24%
Poorly correlated
-1.01%
FATBB - GTIM
22%
Poorly correlated
+1.53%
ARKR - GTIM
21%
Poorly correlated
-1.35%
BJRI - GTIM
21%
Poorly correlated
-1.54%
More