GMHLF
Price
$0.09
Change
+$0.03 (+50.00%)
Updated
Feb 3 closing price
Capitalization
190.67M
SVCTF
Price
$264.89
Change
+$20.99 (+8.61%)
Updated
Sep 16 closing price
Capitalization
639.07M
Interact to see
Advertisement

GMHLF vs SVCTF

Header iconGMHLF vs SVCTF Comparison
Open Charts GMHLF vs SVCTFBanner chart's image
Gam Holding AG
Price$0.09
Change+$0.03 (+50.00%)
Volume$65.45K
Capitalization190.67M
Senvest Capital
Price$264.89
Change+$20.99 (+8.61%)
Volume$110
Capitalization639.07M
GMHLF vs SVCTF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
SVCTF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GMHLF vs. SVCTF commentary
Sep 26, 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 GMHLF is a Hold and SVCTF is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Sep 26, 2025
Stock price -- (GMHLF: $0.09 vs. SVCTF: $264.89)
Brand notoriety: GMHLF and SVCTF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GMHLF: 100% vs. SVCTF: 89%
Market capitalization -- GMHLF: $190.67M vs. SVCTF: $639.07M
GMHLF [@Investment Managers] is valued at $190.67M. SVCTF’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $639.07M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $177.66B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $7.38B.

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).

GMHLF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileSVCTF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

SVCTF’s TA Score shows that 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • SVCTF’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 3 bearish.

Price Growth

GMHLF (@Investment Managers) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while SVCTF (@Investment Managers) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was -2.00%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.60%, and the average quarterly price growth was +23.05%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (-2.00% weekly)

Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
SVCTF($639M) has a higher market cap than GMHLF($191M). GMHLF YTD gains are higher at: 41.667 vs. SVCTF (0.337). SVCTF has less debt than GMHLF: SVCTF (641K) vs GMHLF (16.5M). SVCTF has higher revenues than GMHLF: SVCTF (766M) vs GMHLF (98.3M).
GMHLFSVCTFGMHLF / SVCTF
Capitalization191M639M30%
EBITDA-57.9MN/A-
Gain YTD41.6670.33712,359%
P/E RatioN/A5.27-
Revenue98.3M766M13%
Total Cash42.7MN/A-
Total Debt16.5M641K2,574%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GMHLF vs SVCTF: Fundamental Ratings
GMHLF
SVCTF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
4534
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
88
Overvalued
72
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10037
SMR RATING
1..100
9983
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
8050
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9614
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
8585

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.

SVCTF's Valuation (72) in the null industry is in the same range as GMHLF (88). This means that SVCTF’s stock grew similarly to GMHLF’s over the last 12 months.

SVCTF's Profit vs Risk Rating (37) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GMHLF (100). This means that SVCTF’s stock grew somewhat faster than GMHLF’s over the last 12 months.

SVCTF's SMR Rating (83) in the null industry is in the same range as GMHLF (99). This means that SVCTF’s stock grew similarly to GMHLF’s over the last 12 months.

SVCTF's Price Growth Rating (50) in the null industry is in the same range as GMHLF (80). This means that SVCTF’s stock grew similarly to GMHLF’s over the last 12 months.

SVCTF's P/E Growth Rating (14) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for GMHLF (96). This means that SVCTF’s stock grew significantly faster than GMHLF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GMHLFSVCTF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
51%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
58%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
48%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
48%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
27%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
46%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
19%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
48%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 29 days ago
46%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
54%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
53%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
SVCTF
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 %
ANOGX24.08N/A
N/A
American Century Small Cap Growth R5
ISGNX17.05N/A
N/A
Columbia Integrated Small Cap Gr Instl
GSRLX13.04N/A
N/A
Goldman Sachs Rising Dividend Gr Instl
GPROX16.54N/A
N/A
Grandeur Peak Global Reach Inv
GTILX30.76N/A
N/A
Glenmede Disciplined USGrEqPtf InstlShrs

GMHLF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GMHLF
1D Price
Change %
GMHLF100%
N/A
SVCTF - GMHLF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GBLBY - GMHLF
8%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FRRPF - GMHLF
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
HALFF - GMHLF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GLAE - GMHLF
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

SVCTF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, SVCTF has been loosely correlated with MGLLF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if SVCTF jumps, then MGLLF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SVCTF
1D Price
Change %
SVCTF100%
N/A
MGLLF - SVCTF
36%
Loosely correlated
N/A
GMHLF - SVCTF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
TGOPY - SVCTF
16%
Poorly correlated
+1.90%
STJPF - SVCTF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
UBAAF - SVCTF
3%
Poorly correlated
-10.57%
More