Advertisement
FHI vs SEIC
Notable companies
Industry description
Market Cap
High and low price notable news
Volume
Fundamental Analysis Ratings
The average fundamental analysis ratings, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, are as follows
Market Cap
High and low price notable news
Volume
Fundamental Analysis Ratings
The average fundamental analysis ratings, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, are as follows
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 FHI is a StrongBuy and SEIC 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).
SEIC’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileFHI’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).
- SEIC’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- FHI’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 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.
FHI’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SEIC’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).
- FHI’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
- SEIC’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 5 bearish.
Price Growth
FHI (@Investment Managers) experienced а -3.12% price change this week, while SEIC (@Investment Managers) price change was -1.11% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -0.69%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +6.60%, and the average quarterly price growth was +10.15%.
Reported Earning Dates
FHI is expected to report earnings on Oct 22, 2026.
SEIC is expected to report earnings on Oct 28, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Investment Managers (-0.69% weekly)Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.
| FHI | SEIC | FHI / SEIC | |
| Capitalization | 4.66B | 13.2B | 35% |
| EBITDA | 592M | 1.01B | 59% |
| Gain YTD | 22.206 | 35.376 | 63% |
| P/E Ratio | 11.60 | 19.47 | 60% |
| Revenue | 1.93B | 2.45B | 79% |
| Total Cash | N/A | 421M | - |
| Total Debt | 452M | 67.9M | 666% |
SEIC | FHI | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 88 | 72 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 92 Overvalued | 16 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 13 | 9 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 35 | 30 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 40 | 49 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 29 | 46 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 75 | 65 |
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.
FHI's Valuation (16) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for SEIC (92) in the Investment Managers industry. This means that FHI’s stock grew significantly faster than SEIC’s over the last 12 months.
FHI's Profit vs Risk Rating (9) in the null industry is in the same range as SEIC (13) in the Investment Managers industry. This means that FHI’s stock grew similarly to SEIC’s over the last 12 months.
FHI's SMR Rating (30) in the null industry is in the same range as SEIC (35) in the Investment Managers industry. This means that FHI’s stock grew similarly to SEIC’s over the last 12 months.
SEIC's Price Growth Rating (40) in the Investment Managers industry is in the same range as FHI (49) in the null industry. This means that SEIC’s stock grew similarly to FHI’s over the last 12 months.
SEIC's P/E Growth Rating (29) in the Investment Managers industry is in the same range as FHI (46) in the null industry. This means that SEIC’s stock grew similarly to FHI’s over the last 12 months.
| FHI | SEIC | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 53% | 2 days ago 44% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 72% | 2 days ago 59% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 42% | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 52% | 2 days ago 60% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 46% | 2 days ago 54% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 48% | 2 days ago 53% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 64% | 9 days ago 53% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 49% | 4 days ago 52% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 74% | 2 days ago 49% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 59% | 2 days ago 49% |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| JUDO | 28.59 | 0.12 | +0.41% |
| Janus Henderson U.S. Eq Enhanced Inc ETF | |||
| FTMS | 9.86 | 0.01 | +0.05% |
| Franklin Short-Term Municipal Income ETF | |||
| LEMB | 43.31 | N/A | N/A |
| iShares JP Morgan EM Local Ccy Bd ETF | |||
| PBUS | 77.27 | -0.31 | -0.40% |
| Invesco MSCI USA ETF | |||
| DRUP | 68.85 | -1.11 | -1.59% |
| GraniteShares Nasdaq Sel Disruptors ETF | |||
FHI and Stocks
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FHI has been loosely correlated with VRTS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 60% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FHI jumps, then VRTS could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FHI | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FHI | 100% | +0.39% | ||
| VRTS - FHI | 60% Loosely correlated | +0.78% | ||
| BEN - FHI | 58% Loosely correlated | +3.52% | ||
| IVZ - FHI | 58% Loosely correlated | +1.10% | ||
| BLK - FHI | 57% Loosely correlated | -0.34% | ||
| APAM - FHI | 57% Loosely correlated | +1.02% | ||
More | ||||
SEIC and Stocks
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SEIC has been loosely correlated with AMP. These tickers have moved in lockstep 66% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if SEIC jumps, then AMP could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To SEIC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEIC | 100% | -0.96% | ||
| AMP - SEIC | 66% Loosely correlated | -0.80% | ||
| BLK - SEIC | 55% Loosely correlated | -0.34% | ||
| KKR - SEIC | 52% Loosely correlated | -1.85% | ||
| APAM - SEIC | 51% Loosely correlated | +1.02% | ||
| STT - SEIC | 49% Loosely correlated | +0.16% | ||
More | ||||