GLAPF
Price
$13.99
Change
+$0.17 (+1.23%)
Updated
Jan 10 closing price
Capitalization
4.15B
GRBMF
Price
$2.39
Change
-$0.06 (-2.45%)
Updated
Jan 16 closing price
Capitalization
23.09B
Ad is loading...

GLAPF vs GRBMF

Header iconGLAPF vs GRBMF Comparison
Open Charts GLAPF vs GRBMFBanner chart's image
Glanbia
Price$13.99
Change+$0.17 (+1.23%)
Volume$108
Capitalization4.15B
Grupo Bimbo S.A.B. de C.V
Price$2.39
Change-$0.06 (-2.45%)
Volume$5K
Capitalization23.09B
GLAPF vs GRBMF Comparison Chart
Loading...
GLAPF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GRBMF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GLAPF vs. GRBMF commentary
Jan 19, 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 GLAPF is a Hold and GRBMF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (GLAPF: $13.99 vs. GRBMF: $2.39)
Brand notoriety: GLAPF and GRBMF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Food: Specialty/Candy industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GLAPF: 37% vs. GRBMF: 111%
Market capitalization -- GLAPF: $4.15B vs. GRBMF: $23.09B
GLAPF [@Food: Specialty/Candy] is valued at $4.15B. GRBMF’s [@Food: Specialty/Candy] market capitalization is $23.09B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Food: Specialty/Candy] industry ranges from $327.81B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Food: Specialty/Candy] industry is $9.18B.

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).

GLAPF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileGRBMF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • GLAPF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
  • GRBMF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, GRBMF is a better buy in the long-term than GLAPF.

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.

GLAPF’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GRBMF’s TA Score has 1 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • GLAPF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 2 bearish.
  • GRBMF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, GLAPF is a better buy in the short-term than GRBMF.

Price Growth

GLAPF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while GRBMF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) price change was -2.45% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food: Specialty/Candy industry was +0.73%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.03%, and the average quarterly price growth was +21.73%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Food: Specialty/Candy (+0.73% weekly)

A specialty/candy manufacturer specializes in one or more of the following: chocolate, candies, pasta, condiments, seasonings, among other items. Hershey Company, McCormick & Company and J.M. Smucker Company are some of the major firms in this segment. Demand for this industry’s products comes from both institutions/restaurants as well as households.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
GRBMF($23.1B) has a higher market cap than GLAPF($4.15B). GLAPF has higher P/E ratio than GRBMF: GLAPF (18.98) vs GRBMF (12.17). GLAPF YTD gains are higher at: 0.720 vs. GRBMF (-7.775). GRBMF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 71.7B vs. GLAPF (387M). GRBMF has more cash in the bank: 7.19B vs. GLAPF (439M). GLAPF has less debt than GRBMF: GLAPF (1.01B) vs GRBMF (120B). GRBMF has higher revenues than GLAPF: GRBMF (408B) vs GLAPF (5.64B).
GLAPFGRBMFGLAPF / GRBMF
Capitalization4.15B23.1B18%
EBITDA387M71.7B1%
Gain YTD0.720-7.775-9%
P/E Ratio18.9812.17156%
Revenue5.64B408B1%
Total Cash439M7.19B6%
Total Debt1.01B120B1%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GLAPF vs GRBMF: Fundamental Ratings
GLAPF
GRBMF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8869
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
39
Fair valued
41
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
5880
SMR RATING
1..100
6661
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8289
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
7724
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/a

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.

GLAPF's Valuation (39) in the null industry is in the same range as GRBMF (41). This means that GLAPF’s stock grew similarly to GRBMF’s over the last 12 months.

GLAPF's Profit vs Risk Rating (58) in the null industry is in the same range as GRBMF (80). This means that GLAPF’s stock grew similarly to GRBMF’s over the last 12 months.

GRBMF's SMR Rating (61) in the null industry is in the same range as GLAPF (66). This means that GRBMF’s stock grew similarly to GLAPF’s over the last 12 months.

GLAPF's Price Growth Rating (82) in the null industry is in the same range as GRBMF (89). This means that GLAPF’s stock grew similarly to GRBMF’s over the last 12 months.

GRBMF's P/E Growth Rating (24) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GLAPF (77). This means that GRBMF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GLAPF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GLAPFGRBMF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
38%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
42%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
82%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
35%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
64%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
28%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
60%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
28%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
76%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
30%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
63%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
29%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
56%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
52%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
18%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
82%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
GLAPF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
GRBMF
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 %
MACGX15.420.24
+1.58%
Morgan Stanley Inst Discovery A
WCEYX20.820.20
+0.97%
Macquarie Core Equity Fund Class Y
IGIUX98.120.88
+0.90%
Integrity Growth & Income Fund C
AIVSX58.960.52
+0.89%
American Funds Invmt Co of Amer A
APSRX17.190.04
+0.23%
NYLI Fiera SMID Growth Class A

GLAPF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GLAPF has been loosely correlated with HNFSA. These tickers have moved in lockstep 38% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GLAPF jumps, then HNFSA could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GLAPF
1D Price
Change %
GLAPF100%
N/A
HNFSA - GLAPF
38%
Loosely correlated
N/A
UVRBF - GLAPF
32%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FRPT - GLAPF
21%
Poorly correlated
+1.30%
GRBMF - GLAPF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GLUC - GLAPF
2%
Poorly correlated
-1.57%
More

GRBMF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GRBMF and BMBOY have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GRBMF and BMBOY's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GRBMF
1D Price
Change %
GRBMF100%
N/A
BMBOY - GRBMF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GLUC - GRBMF
4%
Poorly correlated
-1.57%
GCHOY - GRBMF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GPAGF - GRBMF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GLAPF - GRBMF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More