GPFOF
Price
$2.55
Change
-$0.15 (-5.56%)
Updated
Jul 23 closing price
Capitalization
14.96B
NODB
Price
$57.25
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jul 31 closing price
Capitalization
98.4M
Interact to see
Advertisement

GPFOF vs NODB

Header iconGPFOF vs NODB Comparison
Open Charts GPFOF vs NODBBanner chart's image
Grupo Financiero Inbursa, S.A. de C.V
Price$2.55
Change-$0.15 (-5.56%)
Volume$220
Capitalization14.96B
North Dallas Bank & Trust Co. (TX)
Price$57.25
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$135
Capitalization98.4M
GPFOF vs NODB Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
GPFOF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
NODB
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
GPFOF vs. NODB commentary
Aug 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 GPFOF is a Hold and NODB is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 05, 2025
Stock price -- (GPFOF: $2.55 vs. NODB: $57.25)
Brand notoriety: GPFOF and NODB are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: GPFOF: 12% vs. NODB: 23%
Market capitalization -- GPFOF: $14.96B vs. NODB: $98.4M
GPFOF [@Regional Banks] is valued at $14.96B. NODB’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $98.4M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $6.06B.

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).

GPFOF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileNODB’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • GPFOF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • NODB’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, GPFOF is a better buy in the long-term than NODB.

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.

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

  • GPFOF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 5 bearish.
  • NODB’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, NODB is a better buy in the short-term than GPFOF.

Price Growth

GPFOF (@Regional Banks) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while NODB (@Regional Banks) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -1.05%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.18%, and the average quarterly price growth was +7.39%.

Reported Earning Dates

NODB is expected to report earnings on Jul 18, 2025.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (-1.05% weekly)

Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
GPFOF($15B) has a higher market cap than NODB($98.4M). NODB YTD gains are higher at: 27.688 vs. GPFOF (8.511). NODB has less debt than GPFOF: NODB (5.45M) vs GPFOF (68.2B). GPFOF has higher revenues than NODB: GPFOF (62.4B) vs NODB (28.7M).
GPFOFNODBGPFOF / NODB
Capitalization15B98.4M15,244%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD8.51127.68831%
P/E Ratio9.60N/A-
Revenue62.4B28.7M217,422%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt68.2B5.45M1,252,525%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
GPFOF vs NODB: Fundamental Ratings
GPFOF
NODB
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
58
Fair valued
67
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
32100
SMR RATING
1..100
272
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5146
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
6610
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.

GPFOF's Valuation (58) in the null industry is in the same range as NODB (67). This means that GPFOF’s stock grew similarly to NODB’s over the last 12 months.

GPFOF's Profit vs Risk Rating (32) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for NODB (100). This means that GPFOF’s stock grew significantly faster than NODB’s over the last 12 months.

GPFOF's SMR Rating (2) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for NODB (72). This means that GPFOF’s stock grew significantly faster than NODB’s over the last 12 months.

NODB's Price Growth Rating (46) in the null industry is in the same range as GPFOF (51). This means that NODB’s stock grew similarly to GPFOF’s over the last 12 months.

NODB's P/E Growth Rating (10) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GPFOF (66). This means that NODB’s stock grew somewhat faster than GPFOF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
GPFOFNODB
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
48%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
25%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
62%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
24%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
61%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
15%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
53%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
22%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
48%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
24%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
46%
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
24%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
69%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
21%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
33%
Bearish Trend 4 days ago
19%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
GPFOF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
NODB
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 %
RTBBF25.61N/A
N/A
RATHBONES GROUP PLC.
ASHXF0.18N/A
N/A
Progressive Planet Solutions Inc.
NODB57.25N/A
N/A
North Dallas Bank & Trust Co. (TX)
TMTNF100.36-1.32
-1.30%
Toromont Industries Ltd.
RLXXF51.75-1.00
-1.89%
RELX PLC

GPFOF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GPFOF has been loosely correlated with BNCZF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 50% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GPFOF jumps, then BNCZF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To GPFOF
1D Price
Change %
GPFOF100%
N/A
BNCZF - GPFOF
50%
Loosely correlated
N/A
CSHX - GPFOF
41%
Loosely correlated
-0.61%
ALBKY - GPFOF
37%
Loosely correlated
-1.46%
SLRK - GPFOF
34%
Loosely correlated
-0.11%
OSBK - GPFOF
32%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

NODB and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that NODB and CWBK have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that NODB and CWBK's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To NODB
1D Price
Change %
NODB100%
N/A
CWBK - NODB
26%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SLBK - NODB
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GPFOF - NODB
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WCFB - NODB
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SPXXF - NODB
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More