GBHPF vs GTBIF
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 GBHPF is a Hold and GTBIF 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).
GBHPF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGTBIF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- GBHPF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- GTBIF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 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.
GBHPF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GTBIF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- GBHPF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 4 bearish.
- GTBIF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
GBHPF (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) experienced а +25.00% price change this week, while GTBIF (@Pharmaceuticals: Other) price change was -5.67% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pharmaceuticals: Other industry was +0.61%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.68%, and the average quarterly price growth was -9.09%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pharmaceuticals: Other (+0.61% weekly)Pharmaceuticals (Other) comprise companies that are involved in the discovery, development or manufacturing of therapeutic and preventative medicines. They often collaborate with or acquire other pharmaceutical/healthcare firms. Examples of companies in this segment include Bausch Health Companies Inc., Icon Plc and Perrigo Company Plc.
| GBHPF | GTBIF | GBHPF / GTBIF | |
| Capitalization | 1.35M | 1.68B | 0% |
| EBITDA | -1.65M | 253M | -1% |
| Gain YTD | -26.471 | -29.318 | 90% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | 172.41 | - |
| Revenue | 0 | 1.02B | - |
| Total Cash | 3.86K | 185M | 0% |
| Total Debt | 507K | 541M | 0% |
GBHPF | GTBIF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 53 | 51 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 98 Overvalued | 73 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 100 | 84 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 94 | 88 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 100 | 98 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 20 |
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.
GTBIF's Valuation (73) in the null industry is in the same range as GBHPF (98). This means that GTBIF’s stock grew similarly to GBHPF’s over the last 12 months.
GTBIF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as GBHPF (100). This means that GTBIF’s stock grew similarly to GBHPF’s over the last 12 months.
GTBIF's SMR Rating (84) in the null industry is in the same range as GBHPF (100). This means that GTBIF’s stock grew similarly to GBHPF’s over the last 12 months.
GTBIF's Price Growth Rating (88) in the null industry is in the same range as GBHPF (94). This means that GTBIF’s stock grew similarly to GBHPF’s over the last 12 months.
GTBIF's P/E Growth Rating (98) in the null industry is in the same range as GBHPF (100). This means that GTBIF’s stock grew similarly to GBHPF’s over the last 12 months.
| GBHPF | GTBIF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 90% | 2 days ago 78% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 90% | 2 days ago 81% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 90% | 2 days ago 84% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 90% | 2 days ago 77% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 77% | 2 days ago 83% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 89% | 2 days ago 84% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 22 days ago 84% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 3 days ago 90% | 7 days ago 82% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 90% | 2 days ago 90% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 83% |
GBHPF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that GBHPF and CXXIF have been poorly correlated (+14% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GBHPF and CXXIF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To GBHPF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GBHPF | 100% | +25.00% | ||
| CXXIF - GBHPF | 14% Poorly correlated | +0.16% | ||
| GTBIF - GBHPF | 10% Poorly correlated | +3.23% | ||
| DBCCF - GBHPF | 9% Poorly correlated | -7.73% | ||
| ELTP - GBHPF | 7% Poorly correlated | +5.71% | ||
| HLTRF - GBHPF | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
GTBIF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GTBIF has been closely correlated with TCNNF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 83% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if GTBIF jumps, then TCNNF could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To GTBIF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GTBIF | 100% | +3.23% | ||
| TCNNF - GTBIF | 83% Closely correlated | +7.34% | ||
| CURLF - GTBIF | 82% Closely correlated | +9.46% | ||
| VRNOF - GTBIF | 80% Closely correlated | +6.56% | ||
| TSNDF - GTBIF | 78% Closely correlated | +24.34% | ||
| CRLBF - GTBIF | 71% Closely correlated | -0.15% | ||
More | ||||