FFDF
Price
$35.00
Change
+$0.50 (+1.45%)
Updated
Jun 24 closing price
Capitalization
25.35M
FFWC
Price
$39.70
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jun 11 closing price
Capitalization
12.29M
Interact to see
Advertisement

FFDF vs FFWC

Header iconFFDF vs FFWC Comparison
Open Charts FFDF vs FFWCBanner chart's image
FFD Financial
Price$35.00
Change+$0.50 (+1.45%)
Volume$820
Capitalization25.35M
FFW
Price$39.70
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$100
Capitalization12.29M
FFDF vs FFWC Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
FFDF vs. FFWC commentary
Jun 26, 2025

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 FFDF is a Hold and FFWC is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jun 26, 2025
Stock price -- (FFDF: $35.00 vs. FFWC: $39.40)
Brand notoriety: FFDF and FFWC are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: FFDF: 63% vs. FFWC: 25%
Market capitalization -- FFDF: $25.35M vs. FFWC: $12.29M
FFDF [@Regional Banks] is valued at $25.35M. FFWC’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $12.29M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $6.03B.

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).

FFDF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileFFWC’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • FFDF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • FFWC’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, FFDF is a better buy in the long-term than FFWC.

Price Growth

FFDF (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while FFWC (@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 +1.57%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.20%, and the average quarterly price growth was +8.09%.

Reported Earning Dates

FFDF is expected to report earnings on Jan 29, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+1.57% 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.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
FFDF($25.4M) has a higher market cap than FFWC($12.3M). FFDF YTD gains are higher at: 7.947 vs. FFWC (0.000). FFDF has less debt than FFWC: FFDF (13M) vs FFWC (58.7M). FFWC has higher revenues than FFDF: FFWC (10.2M) vs FFDF (9.17M).
FFDFFFWCFFDF / FFWC
Capitalization25.4M12.3M207%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD7.9470.000-
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue9.17M10.2M90%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt13M58.7M22%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
FFDF vs FFWC: Fundamental Ratings
FFDF
FFWC
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
7329
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
84
Overvalued
36
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
3249
SMR RATING
1..100
4163
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4654
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
2513
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50n/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.

FFWC's Valuation (36) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FFDF (84). This means that FFWC’s stock grew somewhat faster than FFDF’s over the last 12 months.

FFDF's Profit vs Risk Rating (32) in the null industry is in the same range as FFWC (49). This means that FFDF’s stock grew similarly to FFWC’s over the last 12 months.

FFDF's SMR Rating (41) in the null industry is in the same range as FFWC (63). This means that FFDF’s stock grew similarly to FFWC’s over the last 12 months.

FFDF's Price Growth Rating (46) in the null industry is in the same range as FFWC (54). This means that FFDF’s stock grew similarly to FFWC’s over the last 12 months.

FFWC's P/E Growth Rating (13) in the null industry is in the same range as FFDF (25). This means that FFWC’s stock grew similarly to FFDF’s over the last 12 months.

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
Interact to see
Advertisement
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
ACGMX22.24N/A
N/A
Invesco Growth and Income Y
LICRX16.85N/A
N/A
Lord Abbett International Equity R3
FCHKX41.57N/A
N/A
Fidelity Advisor China Region C
RICCX61.25-0.01
-0.02%
American Funds Invmt Co of Amer R3
CPECX19.75-0.10
-0.50%
Catalyst Dynamic Alpha C

FFDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that FFDF and BHDB have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FFDF and BHDB's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FFDF
1D Price
Change %
FFDF100%
N/A
BHDB - FFDF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
UNTN - FFDF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FFWC - FFDF
9%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FFMR - FFDF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FFMH - FFDF
5%
Poorly correlated
-0.69%
More