LTGHF vs MCVEF
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 LTGHF is a Hold and MCVEF 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).
LTGHF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMCVEF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).
- LTGHF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- MCVEF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
Price Growth
LTGHF (@Medical/Nursing Services) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MCVEF (@Medical/Nursing Services) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Medical/Nursing Services industry was -2.23%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.62%, and the average quarterly price growth was +1650.69%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Medical/Nursing Services (-2.23% weekly)The medical/nursing services includes companies that provide medical-related services such as ambulance services, dialysis centers, respiratory therapy, blood testing and rehabilitation services. DaVita Inc., Chemed Corporation and Guardant Health, Inc. are examples of companies in this industry.
| LTGHF | MCVEF | LTGHF / MCVEF | |
| Capitalization | 1.31B | 2.29B | 57% |
| EBITDA | 2.96B | 227M | 1,305% |
| Gain YTD | -46.393 | 46.448 | -100% |
| P/E Ratio | 20.17 | 303.03 | 7% |
| Revenue | 27.4B | 1.61B | 1,702% |
| Total Cash | 1.15B | 49.3M | 2,331% |
| Total Debt | 12.1B | 965M | 1,254% |
LTGHF | ||
|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 42 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 2 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 96 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 74 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 95 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 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.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
LTGHF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LTGHF and CHE have been poorly correlated (+29% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LTGHF and CHE's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LTGHF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LTGHF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CHE - LTGHF | 29% Poorly correlated | -0.11% | ||
| INNV - LTGHF | 10% Poorly correlated | -4.70% | ||
| AVAH - LTGHF | 7% Poorly correlated | -0.86% | ||
| AGL - LTGHF | 5% Poorly correlated | +0.53% | ||
| LFST - LTGHF | 0% Poorly correlated | -2.43% | ||
More | ||||
MCVEF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that MCVEF and AGL have been poorly correlated (+6% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MCVEF and AGL's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MCVEF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MCVEF | 100% | N/A | ||
| AGL - MCVEF | 6% Poorly correlated | +0.53% | ||
| AVAH - MCVEF | 3% Poorly correlated | -0.86% | ||
| INNV - MCVEF | 3% Poorly correlated | -4.70% | ||
| LFST - MCVEF | 1% Poorly correlated | -2.43% | ||
| LTGHF - MCVEF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||