LRCDF
Price
$23.60
Change
+$0.87 (+3.83%)
Updated
Jul 1 closing price
Capitalization
1.3B
LUMB
Price
$14.00
Change
+$0.01 (+0.07%)
Updated
Jun 30 closing price
Capitalization
33.74M
Interact to see
Advertisement

LRCDF vs LUMB

Header iconLRCDF vs LUMB Comparison
Open Charts LRCDF vs LUMBBanner chart's image
Laurentian Bank of Canada
Price$23.60
Change+$0.87 (+3.83%)
Volume$122
Capitalization1.3B
Lumbee Guaranty Bank
Price$14.00
Change+$0.01 (+0.07%)
Volume$103
Capitalization33.74M
LRCDF vs LUMB Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
LRCDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
LUMB
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
LRCDF vs. LUMB commentary
Jul 03, 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 LRCDF is a Buy and LUMB is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jul 03, 2025
Stock price -- (LRCDF: $23.60 vs. LUMB: $14.00)
Brand notoriety: LRCDF and LUMB are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: LRCDF: 10% vs. LUMB: 70%
Market capitalization -- LRCDF: $1.3B vs. LUMB: $33.74M
LRCDF [@Regional Banks] is valued at $1.3B. LUMB’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $33.74M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $6.04B.

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).

LRCDF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileLUMB’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • LRCDF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • LUMB’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, LUMB is a better buy in the long-term than LRCDF.

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.

LRCDF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while LUMB’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • LRCDF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • LUMB’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, both LRCDF and LUMB are a good buy in the short-term.

Price Growth

LRCDF (@Regional Banks) experienced а +5.12% price change this week, while LUMB (@Regional Banks) price change was +1.30% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was +3.18%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +4.55%, and the average quarterly price growth was +11.05%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (+3.18% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
LRCDF($1.3B) has a higher market cap than LUMB($33.7M). LRCDF has higher P/E ratio than LUMB: LRCDF (8.54) vs LUMB (6.20). LRCDF YTD gains are higher at: 18.177 vs. LUMB (9.295). LUMB has less debt than LRCDF: LUMB (39K) vs LRCDF (15.4B). LRCDF has higher revenues than LUMB: LRCDF (1.03B) vs LUMB (17.7M).
LRCDFLUMBLRCDF / LUMB
Capitalization1.3B33.7M3,866%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD18.1779.295196%
P/E Ratio8.546.20138%
Revenue1.03B17.7M5,842%
Total CashN/A5.08M-
Total Debt15.4B39K39,487,179%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
LRCDF: Fundamental Ratings
LRCDF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
29
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
12
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
91
SMR RATING
1..100
12
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
47
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
53
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
LRCDFLUMB
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
49%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
49%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
40%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
58%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
43%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
32%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
47%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
45%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
48%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
45%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
37%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
43%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
41%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
LRCDF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
LUMB
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 %
VRSGX31.19N/A
N/A
Virtus KAR Small-Cap Growth R6
MIGYX61.49N/A
N/A
Invesco Main Street Y
WSEFX36.03N/A
N/A
Boston Trust Walden Equity
UAPIX61.34N/A
N/A
ProFunds UltraSmall Cap Inv
RMQHX577.74N/A
N/A
Rydex Monthly Rbl NASDAQ-100® 2x Strt H

LRCDF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that LRCDF and SFBS have been poorly correlated (+28% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LRCDF and SFBS's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LRCDF
1D Price
Change %
LRCDF100%
N/A
SFBS - LRCDF
28%
Poorly correlated
+2.40%
CATY - LRCDF
27%
Poorly correlated
+1.64%
BANR - LRCDF
27%
Poorly correlated
+1.61%
KBCSY - LRCDF
27%
Poorly correlated
+1.00%
FFBC - LRCDF
25%
Poorly correlated
+2.07%
More

LUMB and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that LUMB and NWPP have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LUMB and NWPP's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To LUMB
1D Price
Change %
LUMB100%
N/A
NWPP - LUMB
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FLEW - LUMB
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LRCDF - LUMB
5%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LFGP - LUMB
3%
Poorly correlated
+2.89%
LOGN - LUMB
2%
Poorly correlated
+0.83%
More