FNCSF
Price
$5.26
Change
+$0.04 (+0.77%)
Updated
Aug 14 closing price
Capitalization
305.66M
SLFPY
Price
$10.94
Change
+$0.15 (+1.39%)
Updated
Aug 11 closing price
Capitalization
4.74B
Interact to see
Advertisement

FNCSF vs SLFPY

Header iconFNCSF vs SLFPY Comparison
Open Charts FNCSF vs SLFPYBanner chart's image
North American Financial 15 Split
Price$5.26
Change+$0.04 (+0.77%)
Volume$323
Capitalization305.66M
ABERDEEN GROUP
Price$10.94
Change+$0.15 (+1.39%)
Volume$1.44K
Capitalization4.74B
FNCSF vs SLFPY Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
FNCSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SLFPY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
FNCSF vs. SLFPY commentary
Aug 17, 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 FNCSF is a StrongBuy and SLFPY is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 17, 2025
Stock price -- (FNCSF: $5.26 vs. SLFPY: $10.55)
Brand notoriety: FNCSF and SLFPY are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: FNCSF: 22% vs. SLFPY: 139%
Market capitalization -- FNCSF: $305.66M vs. SLFPY: $4.74B
FNCSF [@Investment Managers] is valued at $305.66M. SLFPY’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $4.74B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $175.76B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $7.67B.

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).

FNCSF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileSLFPY’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • FNCSF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • SLFPY’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, both FNCSF and SLFPY are a good buy in the long-term.

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.

FNCSF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SLFPY’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • FNCSF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • SLFPY’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, SLFPY is a better buy in the short-term than FNCSF.

Price Growth

FNCSF (@Investment Managers) experienced а +0.77% price change this week, while SLFPY (@Investment Managers) price change was +1.39% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was +0.96%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.72%, and the average quarterly price growth was +13.52%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (+0.96% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
SLFPY($4.74B) has a higher market cap than FNCSF($306M). SLFPY has higher P/E ratio than FNCSF: SLFPY (11.57) vs FNCSF (1.27). SLFPY YTD gains are higher at: 67.823 vs. FNCSF (5.200). SLFPY has higher revenues than FNCSF: SLFPY (1.68B) vs FNCSF (200M).
FNCSFSLFPYFNCSF / SLFPY
Capitalization306M4.74B6%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD5.20067.8238%
P/E Ratio1.2711.5711%
Revenue200M1.68B12%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total DebtN/AN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
FNCSF vs SLFPY: Fundamental Ratings
FNCSF
SLFPY
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5033
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
1
Undervalued
10
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
5980
SMR RATING
1..100
1761
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4740
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
8624
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
236

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.

FNCSF's Valuation (1) in the null industry is in the same range as SLFPY (10). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew similarly to SLFPY’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (59) in the null industry is in the same range as SLFPY (80). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew similarly to SLFPY’s over the last 12 months.

FNCSF's SMR Rating (17) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SLFPY (61). This means that FNCSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than SLFPY’s over the last 12 months.

SLFPY's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as FNCSF (47). This means that SLFPY’s stock grew similarly to FNCSF’s over the last 12 months.

SLFPY's P/E Growth Rating (24) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for FNCSF (86). This means that SLFPY’s stock grew somewhat faster than FNCSF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
FNCSFSLFPY
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
43%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
61%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
43%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
58%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
53%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
61%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
46%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
58%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
58%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
50%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
55%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 10 days ago
39%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
67%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
58%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
FNCSF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SLFPY
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
JNVMX18.830.09
+0.48%
JPMorgan Developed International ValueR6
FCNSX18.38N/A
N/A
Fidelity Series Canada
MCSSX39.37-0.09
-0.23%
NYLI WMC Enduring Capital Investor Class
MIISX7.67-0.04
-0.52%
BNY Mellon Income Stock Inv
NQCFX28.43-0.20
-0.70%
NorthQuest Capital

FNCSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that FNCSF and WNDLF have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FNCSF and WNDLF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To FNCSF
1D Price
Change %
FNCSF100%
N/A
WNDLF - FNCSF
28%
Poorly correlated
N/A
APAM - FNCSF
27%
Poorly correlated
-1.42%
AMG - FNCSF
27%
Poorly correlated
-1.92%
SLFPY - FNCSF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CNS - FNCSF
25%
Poorly correlated
-2.22%
More

SLFPY and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SLFPY and SLFPF have been poorly correlated (+27% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SLFPY and SLFPF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SLFPY
1D Price
Change %
SLFPY100%
+3.69%
SLFPF - SLFPY
27%
Poorly correlated
N/A
OWL - SLFPY
26%
Poorly correlated
-3.15%
BLK - SLFPY
25%
Poorly correlated
-2.17%
FNCSF - SLFPY
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
CNS - SLFPY
24%
Poorly correlated
-2.22%
More