FSFG vs HCBC
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 FSFG is a Hold and HCBC 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).
FSFG’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileHCBC’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- FSFG’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- HCBC’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
FSFG (@Regional Banks) experienced а +2.39% price change this week, while HCBC (@Regional Banks) price change was +2.09% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -0.91%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.77%, and the average quarterly price growth was +14.82%.
Reported Earning Dates
FSFG is expected to report earnings on Feb 11, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (-0.91% 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.
| FSFG | HCBC | FSFG / HCBC | |
| Capitalization | 115M | 37.5M | 307% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 50.085 | -4.186 | -1,196% |
| P/E Ratio | 18.62 | 8.24 | 226% |
| Revenue | 82.3M | 20.7M | 398% |
| Total Cash | 17.5M | 8.37M | 209% |
| Total Debt | 405M | 5.25M | 7,714% |
FSFG | HCBC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 4 | 90 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 46 Fair valued | 23 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 63 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 53 | 61 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 38 | 52 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 14 | 60 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 75 |
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.
HCBC's Valuation (23) in the null industry is in the same range as FSFG (46) in the Regional Banks industry. This means that HCBC’s stock grew similarly to FSFG’s over the last 12 months.
FSFG's Profit vs Risk Rating (63) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HCBC (100) in the null industry. This means that FSFG’s stock grew somewhat faster than HCBC’s over the last 12 months.
FSFG's SMR Rating (53) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as HCBC (61) in the null industry. This means that FSFG’s stock grew similarly to HCBC’s over the last 12 months.
FSFG's Price Growth Rating (38) in the Regional Banks industry is in the same range as HCBC (52) in the null industry. This means that FSFG’s stock grew similarly to HCBC’s over the last 12 months.
FSFG's P/E Growth Rating (14) in the Regional Banks industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HCBC (60) in the null industry. This means that FSFG’s stock grew somewhat faster than HCBC’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 (%) |
FSFG and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FSFG has been loosely correlated with BWFG. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FSFG jumps, then BWFG could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FSFG | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FSFG | 100% | +1.19% | ||
| BWFG - FSFG | 35% Loosely correlated | +0.78% | ||
| CHMG - FSFG | 35% Loosely correlated | +0.75% | ||
| CFSB - FSFG | 33% Loosely correlated | -0.74% | ||
| TBNK - FSFG | 33% Loosely correlated | +0.82% | ||
| BFIN - FSFG | 31% Poorly correlated | +1.60% | ||
More | ||||
HCBC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that HCBC and MCHB have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that HCBC and MCHB's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To HCBC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HCBC | 100% | N/A | ||
| MCHB - HCBC | 26% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LSFG - HCBC | 21% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| NWG - HCBC | 20% Poorly correlated | +0.43% | ||
| BSBK - HCBC | 20% Poorly correlated | -0.60% | ||
| FSFG - HCBC | 20% Poorly correlated | +1.19% | ||
More | ||||