KMBIF
Price
$14.33
Change
+$1.31 (+10.06%)
Updated
Jul 1 closing price
Capitalization
394.3M
MCHVF
Price
$2.05
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Aug 20 closing price
Capitalization
7.81B
Interact to see
Advertisement

KMBIF vs MCHVF

Header iconKMBIF vs MCHVF Comparison
Open Charts KMBIF vs MCHVFBanner chart's image
Kambi Group
Price$14.33
Change+$1.31 (+10.06%)
Volume$200
Capitalization394.3M
MGM China Holdings
Price$2.05
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$200
Capitalization7.81B
KMBIF vs MCHVF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
KMBIF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MCHVF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
KMBIF vs. MCHVF commentary
Aug 29, 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 KMBIF is a Hold and MCHVF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 29, 2025
Stock price -- (KMBIF: $14.33 vs. MCHVF: $2.05)
Brand notoriety: KMBIF and MCHVF are both not notable
KMBIF represents the Casinos/Gaming, while MCHVF is part of the Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: KMBIF: 45% vs. MCHVF: 26%
Market capitalization -- KMBIF: $394.3M vs. MCHVF: $7.81B
KMBIF [@Casinos/Gaming] is valued at $394.3M. MCHVF’s [@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines] market capitalization is $7.81B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Casinos/Gaming] industry ranges from $54.24B to $0. The market cap for tickers in the [@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines] industry ranges from $39.62B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Casinos/Gaming] industry is $5.61B. The average market capitalization across the [@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines] industry is $5.89B.

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).

KMBIF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileMCHVF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

KMBIF’s TA Score shows that 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MCHVF’s TA Score has 3 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • KMBIF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 0 bearish.
  • MCHVF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, KMBIF is a better buy in the short-term than MCHVF.

Price Growth

KMBIF (@Casinos/Gaming) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MCHVF (@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Casinos/Gaming industry was +10.68%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +5.28%, and the average quarterly price growth was +24.04%.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines industry was +2.08%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.54%, and the average quarterly price growth was +12.54%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Casinos/Gaming (+10.68% weekly)

Casinos/Gaming includes companies that operate casinos, gaming services, horse racing and harness racing facilities. Think Las Vegas Sands Corp., MGM Resorts International and Wynn Resorts, Ltd. In periods of strong economic growth, consumers tend to spend on discretionary/leisure activities like gambling or games; but consumption is likely to slow down when there’s economic sluggishness.

@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines (+2.08% weekly)

The industry includes companies that operate and manage one or more of the following: lodging facilities (e.g. hotels and motels), resorts (e.g. ski resorts), spas, cruise ships and timeshare facilities. Marriott International, Inc., Carnival Corporation, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. and Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. are some of the biggest names in this industry.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
MCHVF($7.81B) has a higher market cap than KMBIF($394M). KMBIF has higher P/E ratio than MCHVF: KMBIF (42.31) vs MCHVF (14.15). MCHVF YTD gains are higher at: 95.238 vs. KMBIF (49.582).
KMBIFMCHVFKMBIF / MCHVF
Capitalization394M7.81B5%
EBITDA52.1MN/A-
Gain YTD49.58295.23852%
P/E Ratio42.3114.15299%
Revenue169MN/A-
Total Cash53.1MN/A-
Total Debt8MN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
KMBIF vs MCHVF: Fundamental Ratings
KMBIF
MCHVF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
4634
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
67
Overvalued
23
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
10060
SMR RATING
1..100
100100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4439
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
100100
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
3675

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.

MCHVF's Valuation (23) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for KMBIF (67). This means that MCHVF’s stock grew somewhat faster than KMBIF’s over the last 12 months.

MCHVF's Profit vs Risk Rating (60) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for KMBIF (100). This means that MCHVF’s stock grew somewhat faster than KMBIF’s over the last 12 months.

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

MCHVF's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as KMBIF (44). This means that MCHVF’s stock grew similarly to KMBIF’s over the last 12 months.

MCHVF's P/E Growth Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as KMBIF (100). This means that MCHVF’s stock grew similarly to KMBIF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
KMBIFMCHVF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
67%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
48%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
55%
MACD
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
56%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
41%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
42%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
52%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
46%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
43%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
KMBIF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
MCHVF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
YINN45.671.14
+2.56%
Direxion Daily FTSE China Bull 3X ETF
TDSB22.750.02
+0.09%
ETC Cabana Target Beta ETF
XAPR35.600.01
+0.04%
FT Vest US Eq Enh & Mod Buf ETF-Apr
JCE15.70N/A
N/A
Nuveen Core Equity Alpha Fund
FDWM25.25N/A
N/A
Fidelity Women's Leadership ETF

KMBIF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that KMBIF and ARHN have been poorly correlated (+21% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that KMBIF and ARHN's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To KMBIF
1D Price
Change %
KMBIF100%
N/A
ARHN - KMBIF
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GRKZF - KMBIF
0%
Poorly correlated
+7.33%
MCHVF - KMBIF
-1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LFDJF - KMBIF
-1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GXYYY - KMBIF
-2%
Poorly correlated
+0.84%
More

MCHVF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MCHVF has been loosely correlated with SKYZF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MCHVF jumps, then SKYZF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MCHVF
1D Price
Change %
MCHVF100%
N/A
SKYZF - MCHVF
35%
Loosely correlated
N/A
SCHYF - MCHVF
32%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MCHVY - MCHVF
17%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GXYYY - MCHVF
16%
Poorly correlated
+0.84%
GXYEF - MCHVF
15%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More