HUT
Price
$21.14
Change
-$0.51 (-2.36%)
Updated
Jul 24 closing price
Capitalization
985.18M
MATH
Price
$3.61
Change
-$0.03 (-0.82%)
Updated
Jul 24 closing price
Capitalization
55.42M
Interact to see
Advertisement

HUT vs MATH

Header iconHUT vs MATH Comparison
Open Charts HUT vs MATHBanner chart's image
Hut 8
Price$21.14
Change-$0.51 (-2.36%)
Volume$3.32M
Capitalization985.18M
Metalpha Technology Holding
Price$3.61
Change-$0.03 (-0.82%)
Volume$257.01K
Capitalization55.42M
HUT vs MATH Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
HUT
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MATH
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
HUT vs. MATH commentary
Jul 25, 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 HUT is a Hold and MATH is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 25, 2025
Stock price -- (HUT: $21.14 vs. MATH: $3.61)
Brand notoriety: HUT and MATH are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Banks/Brokers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: HUT: 54% vs. MATH: 111%
Market capitalization -- HUT: $985.18M vs. MATH: $55.42M
HUT [@Investment Banks/Brokers] is valued at $985.18M. MATH’s [@Investment Banks/Brokers] market capitalization is $55.42M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Banks/Brokers] industry ranges from $928.5B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Banks/Brokers] industry is $12.19B.

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).

HUT’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileMATH’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

HUT’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MATH’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • HUT’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • MATH’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 5 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both HUT and MATH are a bad buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

HUT (@Investment Banks/Brokers) experienced а -4.43% price change this week, while MATH (@Investment Banks/Brokers) price change was +6.18% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Banks/Brokers industry was -0.59%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +14.91%, and the average quarterly price growth was +10.18%.

Reported Earning Dates

HUT is expected to report earnings on May 08, 2025.

MATH is expected to report earnings on Mar 31, 2023.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Banks/Brokers (-0.59% weekly)

These banks specialize in underwriting (helping companies with debt financing or equity issuances), IPOs, facilitating mergers and other corporate reorganizations and acting as a broker or financial advisor for institutions. They might also trade securities on their own accounts. Investment banks potentially thrive on expanding its network of clients, since that could help them increase profits. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and CME Group Inc are some of the largest investment banking companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
HUT($985M) has a higher market cap than MATH($55.4M). MATH YTD gains are higher at: 213.913 vs. HUT (3.172).
HUTMATHHUT / MATH
Capitalization985M55.4M1,778%
EBITDA-80.09MN/A-
Gain YTD3.172213.9131%
P/E Ratio12.84N/A-
Revenue77MN/A-
Total Cash21.1MN/A-
Total Debt79.5MN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
HUT vs MATH: Fundamental Ratings
HUT
MATH
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
1173
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
74
Overvalued
74
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
79100
SMR RATING
1..100
93100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3935
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
7320
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.

HUT's Valuation (74) in the null industry is in the same range as MATH (74). This means that HUT’s stock grew similarly to MATH’s over the last 12 months.

HUT's Profit vs Risk Rating (79) in the null industry is in the same range as MATH (100). This means that HUT’s stock grew similarly to MATH’s over the last 12 months.

HUT's SMR Rating (93) in the null industry is in the same range as MATH (100). This means that HUT’s stock grew similarly to MATH’s over the last 12 months.

MATH's Price Growth Rating (35) in the null industry is in the same range as HUT (39). This means that MATH’s stock grew similarly to HUT’s over the last 12 months.

MATH's P/E Growth Rating (20) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for HUT (73). This means that MATH’s stock grew somewhat faster than HUT’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
HUTMATH
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
88%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
85%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
83%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
87%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
88%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
86%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
90%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
87%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
85%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
84%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 16 days ago
85%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 8 days ago
89%
Bearish Trend 10 days ago
83%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
80%
Bearish Trend 1 day ago
81%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
90%
Bullish Trend 1 day ago
78%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
HUT
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MATH
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 %
LSB1.310.13
+11.02%
LakeShore Biopharma Co Ltd
VVIVF0.06N/A
+3.27%
REPLENISH NUTRIENTS HLDG CORP.
SAPIF21.17N/A
N/A
Saputo Inc.
BGPPF0.01N/A
N/A
CRAFT 1861 Global Holdings Inc.
RAFLF0.75N/A
N/A
Raffles Medical Group Ltd.

MATH and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MATH and HIVE have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MATH and HIVE's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MATH
1D Price
Change %
MATH100%
-0.82%
HIVE - MATH
30%
Poorly correlated
-2.08%
HOOD - MATH
29%
Poorly correlated
-0.15%
CLSK - MATH
28%
Poorly correlated
-0.88%
HUT - MATH
28%
Poorly correlated
-2.36%
BTBT - MATH
27%
Poorly correlated
-3.87%
More