IPHLF
Price
$4.42
Change
-$0.58 (-11.60%)
Updated
Mar 7 closing price
MRLWF
Price
$4.05
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 16 closing price
Ad is loading...

IPHLF vs MRLWF

Header iconIPHLF vs MRLWF Comparison
Open Charts IPHLF vs MRLWFBanner chart's image
IPH
Price$4.42
Change-$0.58 (-11.60%)
Volume$100
CapitalizationN/A
Marlowe
Price$4.05
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$36.12K
CapitalizationN/A
IPHLF vs MRLWF Comparison Chart
Loading...
MRLWF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
IPHLF vs. MRLWF commentary
Dec 19, 2024

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 IPHLF is a Hold and MRLWF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (IPHLF: $4.42 vs. MRLWF: $4.05)
Brand notoriety: IPHLF and MRLWF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Miscellaneous Commercial Services industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: IPHLF: 100% vs. MRLWF: 4%
Market capitalization -- IPHLF: $1.25B vs. MRLWF: $699.98M
IPHLF [@Miscellaneous Commercial Services] is valued at $1.25B. MRLWF’s [@Miscellaneous Commercial Services] market capitalization is $699.98M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Miscellaneous Commercial Services] industry ranges from $80.94B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Miscellaneous Commercial Services] industry is $5.12B.

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).

IPHLF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMRLWF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

MRLWF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • MRLWF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 5 bearish.

Price Growth

IPHLF (@Miscellaneous Commercial Services) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MRLWF (@Miscellaneous Commercial Services) price change was -1.34% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Miscellaneous Commercial Services industry was -2.50%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.29%, and the average quarterly price growth was -0.68%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Miscellaneous Commercial Services (-2.50% weekly)

The sector produces general business services, and are not classified elsewhere. For example, FleetCor Technologies provides fuel cards and workforce payment products and services; Copart, Inc. provides online vehicle auction and remarketing services across various nations; Equifax Inc. collects and aggregates credit information on consumers and businesses worldwide, along with selling credit monitoring and fraud-prevention services. Many of the companies in this category have multi-billion market capitalizations.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
IPHLF($1.25B) has a higher market cap than MRLWF($700M). MRLWF has higher P/E ratio than IPHLF: MRLWF (3333.33) vs IPHLF (40.32). MRLWF YTD gains are higher at: 131.363 vs. IPHLF (-11.600). IPHLF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 131M vs. MRLWF (49.3M). IPHLF has more cash in the bank: 88.4M vs. MRLWF (19.8M). IPHLF has less debt than MRLWF: IPHLF (161M) vs MRLWF (204M). IPHLF (412M) and MRLWF (404M) have equivalent revenues.
IPHLFMRLWFIPHLF / MRLWF
Capitalization1.25B700M178%
EBITDA131M49.3M266%
Gain YTD-11.600131.363-9%
P/E Ratio40.323333.331%
Revenue412M404M102%
Total Cash88.4M19.8M446%
Total Debt161M204M79%
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
IPHLFMRLWF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
42%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
30%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
29%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
3%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
55%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
3%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
45%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 24 days ago
40%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 18 days ago
71%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 4 days ago
40%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
44%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
MRLWF
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 %
GUBGX15.46N/A
N/A
Victory RS International A
COMZX41.21N/A
N/A
DWS Communications Inst
SCDGX35.27-0.16
-0.45%
DWS Core Equity S
THOCX35.36-0.27
-0.76%
Thornburg Global Opportunities C
FGIQX14.99-0.13
-0.86%
Delaware Growth and Income R6

IPHLF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, IPHLF has been loosely correlated with CWPS. These tickers have moved in lockstep 49% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if IPHLF jumps, then CWPS could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To IPHLF
1D Price
Change %
IPHLF100%
N/A
CWPS - IPHLF
49%
Loosely correlated
N/A
TLPFY - IPHLF
47%
Loosely correlated
-2.28%
TLPFF - IPHLF
46%
Loosely correlated
+0.51%
ADT - IPHLF
25%
Poorly correlated
-0.98%
WBQNL - IPHLF
8%
Poorly correlated
-0.73%
More

MRLWF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MRLWF
1D Price
Change %
MRLWF100%
N/A
CPBLF - MRLWF
50%
Loosely correlated
N/A
DIGTF - MRLWF
46%
Loosely correlated
N/A
KPGHF - MRLWF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NPLS - MRLWF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
IPHLF - MRLWF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More