FBASF vs HHDS
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 FBASF is a Hold and HHDS 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).
FBASF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileHHDS’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- FBASF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- HHDS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
FBASF (@Real Estate Investment Trusts) experienced а +11.11% price change this week, while HHDS (@Real Estate Investment Trusts) price change was -24.44% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Real Estate Investment Trusts industry was +2.10%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -2.45%, and the average quarterly price growth was -6.58%.
Reported Earning Dates
FBASF is expected to report earnings on Mar 14, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Real Estate Investment Trusts (+2.10% weekly)A real estate investment trust (REIT) is a company any that owns, and in most cases, operates, income-producing real estate – ranging from office and apartment buildings to warehouses, hospitals, shopping centers, hotels and timberlands. Some REITs are involved in financing real estate. Equity REITs invest in and own properties, while mortgage REITs own and invest in property mortgages. REITs are required by law to pay out at least 90% of their annual taxable income (excluding capital gains) to shareholders in the form of dividends. Some REITs could be more cyclical than others; for example, when an economy is undergoing a recession, hotel REITs could be more vulnerable, compared to say healthcare REIT given that healthcare needs are less likely to depend on economic cycles. American Tower Corporation, Prologis, Inc. and Crown Castle International Corp are some of the biggest REIT companies in the U.S.
| FBASF | HHDS | FBASF / HHDS | |
| Capitalization | 5.74B | 88.8K | 6,467,342% |
| EBITDA | 39.1B | 4.65M | 841,041% |
| Gain YTD | 40.000 | 30.769 | 130% |
| P/E Ratio | 3.47 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 24.6B | 30.8M | 79,870% |
| Total Cash | 3.51B | 34.2M | 10,263% |
| Total Debt | 128B | 71.3M | 179,523% |
FBASF | HHDS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 28 | 83 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 34 Fair valued | 68 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 53 | 90 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 82 | 90 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 40 | 34 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 6 | 2 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 10 | n/a |
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.
FBASF's Valuation (34) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HHDS (68). This means that FBASF’s stock grew somewhat faster than HHDS’s over the last 12 months.
FBASF's Profit vs Risk Rating (53) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HHDS (90). This means that FBASF’s stock grew somewhat faster than HHDS’s over the last 12 months.
FBASF's SMR Rating (82) in the null industry is in the same range as HHDS (90). This means that FBASF’s stock grew similarly to HHDS’s over the last 12 months.
HHDS's Price Growth Rating (34) in the null industry is in the same range as FBASF (40). This means that HHDS’s stock grew similarly to FBASF’s over the last 12 months.
HHDS's P/E Growth Rating (2) in the null industry is in the same range as FBASF (6). This means that HHDS’s stock grew similarly to FBASF’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 (%) |
FBASF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that FBASF and ABR have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FBASF and ABR's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FBASF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FBASF | 100% | +3.70% | ||
| ABR - FBASF | 23% Poorly correlated | -3.07% | ||
| SLG - FBASF | 22% Poorly correlated | +3.34% | ||
| LAMR - FBASF | 22% Poorly correlated | +1.69% | ||
| IIPR - FBASF | 21% Poorly correlated | +1.55% | ||
| PEB - FBASF | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
HHDS and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that HHDS and RSHPF have been poorly correlated (+23% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that HHDS and RSHPF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To HHDS | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HHDS | 100% | -24.44% | ||
| RSHPF - HHDS | 23% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| CBL - HHDS | 16% Poorly correlated | +3.37% | ||
| SQFT - HHDS | 7% Poorly correlated | +0.76% | ||
| FBASF - HHDS | 6% Poorly correlated | +3.70% | ||
| NRWRF - HHDS | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||