HCBC vs LSFG
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 HCBC is a Hold and LSFG 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).
HCBC’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileLSFG’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- HCBC’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- LSFG’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 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.
HCBC’s TA Score shows that 2 TA indicator(s) are bullish while LSFG’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).
- HCBC’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 6 bearish.
- LSFG’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
HCBC (@Regional Banks) experienced а +1.61% price change this week, while LSFG (@Regional Banks) price change was -11.50% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -3.34%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.11%, and the average quarterly price growth was +19.80%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Regional Banks (-3.34% 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.
| HCBC | LSFG | HCBC / LSFG | |
| Capitalization | 37.5M | 8.41M | 446% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | -3.463 | 5.745 | -60% |
| P/E Ratio | 8.24 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 20.7M | N/A | - |
| Total Cash | 8.37M | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 5.25M | N/A | - |
HCBC | LSFG | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 86 | 91 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 21 Undervalued | 29 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 49 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 64 | 54 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 59 | 45 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 22 | 22 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 50 |
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.
HCBC's Valuation (21) in the null industry is in the same range as LSFG (29). This means that HCBC’s stock grew similarly to LSFG’s over the last 12 months.
LSFG's Profit vs Risk Rating (49) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HCBC (100). This means that LSFG’s stock grew somewhat faster than HCBC’s over the last 12 months.
LSFG's SMR Rating (54) in the null industry is in the same range as HCBC (64). This means that LSFG’s stock grew similarly to HCBC’s over the last 12 months.
LSFG's Price Growth Rating (45) in the null industry is in the same range as HCBC (59). This means that LSFG’s stock grew similarly to HCBC’s over the last 12 months.
LSFG's P/E Growth Rating (22) in the null industry is in the same range as HCBC (22). This means that LSFG’s stock grew similarly to HCBC’s over the last 12 months.
| HCBC | LSFG | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 43% | 1 day ago 11% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 30% | 1 day ago 20% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 35% | 1 day ago 19% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 38% | 1 day ago 17% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 36% | 1 day ago 28% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 31% | 1 day ago 19% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 16 days ago 32% | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 25% | 1 day ago 35% |
HCBC and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that HCBC and MCHB have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that HCBC and MCHB's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To HCBC | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HCBC | 100% | N/A | ||
| MCHB - HCBC | 26% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BSBK - HCBC | 21% Poorly correlated | -4.12% | ||
| LSFG - HCBC | 21% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| NWG - HCBC | 21% Poorly correlated | -2.05% | ||
| FSFG - HCBC | 20% Poorly correlated | -5.14% | ||
More | ||||
LSFG and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LSFG and MCHB have been poorly correlated (+26% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LSFG and MCHB's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LSFG | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LSFG | 100% | N/A | ||
| MCHB - LSFG | 26% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BNKHF - LSFG | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| MCHT - LSFG | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| WCFB - LSFG | 23% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| STBI - LSFG | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||