GLUC
Price
$0.08
Change
-$0.02 (-20.00%)
Updated
Jul 3 closing price
Capitalization
647.71K
GRBMF
Price
$2.72
Change
-$0.04 (-1.45%)
Updated
Jun 30 closing price
Capitalization
23.09B
Interact to see
Advertisement

GLUC vs GRBMF

Header iconGLUC vs GRBMF Comparison
Open Charts GLUC vs GRBMFBanner chart's image
Glucose Health
Price$0.08
Change-$0.02 (-20.00%)
Volume$2K
Capitalization647.71K
Grupo Bimbo S.A.B. de C.V
Price$2.72
Change-$0.04 (-1.45%)
Volume$4K
Capitalization23.09B
GLUC vs GRBMF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
GLUC
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
GLUC vs. GRBMF commentary
Jul 05, 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 GLUC is a Hold and GRBMF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 05, 2025
Stock price -- (GLUC: $0.08 vs. GRBMF: $2.72)
Brand notoriety: GLUC and GRBMF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Food: Specialty/Candy industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GLUC: 27% vs. GRBMF: 204%
Market capitalization -- GLUC: $647.71K vs. GRBMF: $23.09B
GLUC [@Food: Specialty/Candy] is valued at $647.71K. 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 $9.47B.

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).

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

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

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.

GLUC’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while GRBMF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • GLUC’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • GRBMF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, GRBMF is a better buy in the short-term than GLUC.

Price Growth

GLUC (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а -7.20% price change this week, while GRBMF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) price change was -1.45% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food: Specialty/Candy industry was +1.77%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.04%, and the average quarterly price growth was +1.36%.

Reported Earning Dates

GLUC is expected to report earnings on Jan 09, 2023.

GRBMF is expected to report earnings on Apr 29, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Food: Specialty/Candy (+1.77% 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 GLUC($648K). GRBMF YTD gains are higher at: 4.959 vs. GLUC (-30.167). GRBMF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 71.7B vs. GLUC (-32.45K). GRBMF has more cash in the bank: 7.19B vs. GLUC (29.3K). GLUC has less debt than GRBMF: GLUC (431K) vs GRBMF (120B). GRBMF has higher revenues than GLUC: GRBMF (408B) vs GLUC (88.1K).
GLUCGRBMFGLUC / GRBMF
Capitalization648K23.1B0%
EBITDA-32.45K71.7B-0%
Gain YTD-30.1674.959-608%
P/E RatioN/A12.17-
Revenue88.1K408B0%
Total Cash29.3K7.19B0%
Total Debt431K120B0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GLUC vs GRBMF: Fundamental Ratings
GLUC
GRBMF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
9250
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
61
Fair valued
49
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10073
SMR RATING
1..100
10065
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8962
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
370
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.

GRBMF's Valuation (49) in the null industry is in the same range as GLUC (61). This means that GRBMF’s stock grew similarly to GLUC’s over the last 12 months.

GRBMF's Profit vs Risk Rating (73) in the null industry is in the same range as GLUC (100). This means that GRBMF’s stock grew similarly to GLUC’s over the last 12 months.

GRBMF's SMR Rating (65) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GLUC (100). This means that GRBMF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GLUC’s over the last 12 months.

GRBMF's Price Growth Rating (62) in the null industry is in the same range as GLUC (89). This means that GRBMF’s stock grew similarly to GLUC’s over the last 12 months.

GLUC's P/E Growth Rating (3) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for GRBMF (70). This means that GLUC’s stock grew significantly faster than GRBMF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GLUCGRBMF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
79%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
74%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
79%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
89%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
83%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
59%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
63%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 5 days ago
65%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
85%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
80%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
GLUC
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
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SNTG1.920.08
+4.62%
Sentage Holdings
PLOW31.350.50
+1.62%
Douglas Dynamics
SLVM53.010.24
+0.45%
Sylvamo Corp
TXT82.230.29
+0.35%
Textron
OKYO2.91N/A
N/A
OKYO Pharma Limited

GLUC and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that GLUC and ZHYBF have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that GLUC and ZHYBF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GLUC
1D Price
Change %
GLUC100%
-17.84%
ZHYBF - GLUC
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GUZOF - GLUC
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GLAPY - GLUC
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GPDNF - GLUC
5%
Poorly correlated
-1.09%
GRBMF - GLUC
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
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
+0.17%
GLUC - GRBMF
4%
Poorly correlated
-17.84%
GCHOY - GRBMF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GPAGF - GRBMF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GLAPF - GRBMF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More