Advertisement
FSHP vs POLE
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 FSHP is a Hold and POLE 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).
FSHP’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whilePOLE’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- FSHP’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- POLE’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
FSHP (@Financial Conglomerates) experienced а -0.74% price change this week, while POLE (@Financial Conglomerates) price change was -0.76% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Financial Conglomerates industry was -0.48%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.53%, and the average quarterly price growth was +36.01%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Financial Conglomerates (-0.48% weekly)Financial conglomerates usually encompass a wide range of financial services including (not necessarily limited to) investment banking, insurance, capital raising/underwriting, trading of financial securities, investment advisory services, wealth management of high net-worth individuals, and retail banking. Think Citigroup, American Express Company, ING Group.
| FSHP | POLE | FSHP / POLE | |
| Capitalization | 53.6M | 310M | 17% |
| EBITDA | -883.83K | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 4.921 | 5.053 | 97% |
| P/E Ratio | 41.00 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 0 | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | 18.8K | 459K | 4% |
| Total Debt | 1.17M | N/A | - |
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| PEJ | 57.40 | 0.64 | +1.13% |
| Invesco Dynamic Leisure and Entmnt ETF | |||
| SPDV | 33.82 | 0.20 | +0.59% |
| AAM S&P 500 High Dividend Value ETF | |||
| BNDS | 50.37 | -0.03 | -0.06% |
| Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF | |||
| MYY | 18.50 | -0.06 | -0.32% |
| ProShares Short MidCap400 | |||
| IYJ | 140.06 | -0.99 | -0.70% |
| iShares US Industrials ETF | |||
FSHP and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that FSHP and POLE have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that FSHP and POLE's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To FSHP | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FSHP | 100% | N/A | ||
| POLE - FSHP | 30% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| AFJK - FSHP | 24% Poorly correlated | -4.45% | ||
| ATMV - FSHP | 24% Poorly correlated | +3.48% | ||
| TVACU - FSHP | 24% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| AFJKU - FSHP | 23% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
POLE and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that POLE and FSHP have been poorly correlated (+31% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that POLE and FSHP's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To POLE | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| POLE | 100% | N/A | ||
| FSHP - POLE | 31% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| TVACU - POLE | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| KVAC - POLE | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| NTWOU - POLE | 9% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BACQU - POLE | 8% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||