JUMSF vs WINH
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 JUMSF is a Hold and WINH 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).
JUMSF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileWINH’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- JUMSF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- WINH’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
Price Growth
JUMSF (@Specialty Stores) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while WINH (@Specialty Stores) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Specialty Stores industry was -0.37%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +9.63%, and the average quarterly price growth was +6.89%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Specialty Stores (-0.37% weekly)The specialty stores sector includes companies dedicated to the sale of retail products focused on a single product category, such as clothing, carpet, books, or office supplies. A specialty store could face intense competition from big-box departmental chains, and therefore offering an adequate collection of the product type it specializes in is key in maintaining/growing its market.
| JUMSF | WINH | JUMSF / WINH | |
| Capitalization | 4.07B | 7.5M | 54,281% |
| EBITDA | 321M | 8.24M | 3,898% |
| Gain YTD | 53.336 | -97.196 | -55% |
| P/E Ratio | 16.00 | N/A | - |
| Revenue | 872M | 16.7M | 5,222% |
| Total Cash | 712M | 1.19M | 59,732% |
| Total Debt | 286M | 5.28M | 5,421% |
JUMSF | WINH | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 39 | 44 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 28 Undervalued | 100 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 7 | 98 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 51 | 1 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 50 | 94 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 77 | 27 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 30 |
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.
JUMSF's Valuation (28) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for WINH (100). This means that JUMSF’s stock grew significantly faster than WINH’s over the last 12 months.
JUMSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (7) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for WINH (98). This means that JUMSF’s stock grew significantly faster than WINH’s over the last 12 months.
WINH's SMR Rating (1) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for JUMSF (51). This means that WINH’s stock grew somewhat faster than JUMSF’s over the last 12 months.
JUMSF's Price Growth Rating (50) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for WINH (94). This means that JUMSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than WINH’s over the last 12 months.
WINH's P/E Growth Rating (27) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for JUMSF (77). This means that WINH’s stock grew somewhat faster than JUMSF’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
JUMSF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that JUMSF and DSITF have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that JUMSF and DSITF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To JUMSF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JUMSF | 100% | N/A | ||
| DSITF - JUMSF | 25% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ZSHGY - JUMSF | 5% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| BQ - JUMSF | 1% Poorly correlated | -12.83% | ||
| WINH - JUMSF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ASO - JUMSF | 0% Poorly correlated | -0.66% | ||
More | ||||
WINH and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that WINH and SSILF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that WINH and SSILF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To WINH | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WINH | 100% | N/A | ||
| SSILF - WINH | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| ARKO - WINH | 11% Poorly correlated | -0.72% | ||
| ZSHGY - WINH | 7% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| DRVN - WINH | 7% Poorly correlated | -1.22% | ||
| EVGO - WINH | 4% Poorly correlated | -1.30% | ||
More | ||||