Advertisement
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 (@Hospital/Nursing Management) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MCVEF (@Hospital/Nursing Management) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Hospital/Nursing Management industry was -3.11%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -7.54%, and the average quarterly price growth was +1.27%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Hospital/Nursing Management (-3.11% weekly)Hospital/Nursing Management companies own and operate health care facilities. Their operations include nursing homes, acute care facilities, retirement centers and outpatient surgery centers. HCA Healthcare Inc., Alcon Inc. and Universal Health Services, Inc. are some major companies in this industry. Technology has been at the forefront of development of advanced solutions, including quicker diagnoses of complex conditions. Investments in new diagnostics, healthcare IoT, and other healthcare technologies continue to gather momentum in this industry.
| LTGHF | MCVEF | LTGHF / MCVEF | |
| Capitalization | 931M | 3.66B | 25% |
| EBITDA | 1.58B | 324M | 489% |
| Gain YTD | -22.030 | 81.063 | -27% |
| P/E Ratio | 10.86 | 52.53 | 21% |
| Revenue | 26.4B | 2.26B | 1,169% |
| Total Cash | 618M | 89.4M | 691% |
| Total Debt | 4.29B | 1.42B | 301% |
LTGHF | MCVEF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 35 | 48 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 7 Undervalued | 47 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 59 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 95 | 72 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 50 | 40 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 46 | 93 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 30 | 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.
LTGHF's Valuation (7) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MCVEF (47). This means that LTGHF’s stock grew somewhat faster than MCVEF’s over the last 12 months.
MCVEF's Profit vs Risk Rating (59) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LTGHF (100). This means that MCVEF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LTGHF’s over the last 12 months.
MCVEF's SMR Rating (72) in the null industry is in the same range as LTGHF (95). This means that MCVEF’s stock grew similarly to LTGHF’s over the last 12 months.
MCVEF's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as LTGHF (50). This means that MCVEF’s stock grew similarly to LTGHF’s over the last 12 months.
LTGHF's P/E Growth Rating (46) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MCVEF (93). This means that LTGHF’s stock grew somewhat faster than MCVEF’s over the last 12 months.
| LTGHF | MCVEF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 4% | 2 days ago 16% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 4% | 2 days ago 18% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
Advertisement
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 | -1.27% | ||
| INNV - LTGHF | 10% Poorly correlated | -10.02% | ||
| AVAH - LTGHF | 7% Poorly correlated | +0.12% | ||
| AGL - LTGHF | 5% Poorly correlated | -6.26% | ||
| LFST - LTGHF | 0% Poorly correlated | -0.16% | ||
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 | -6.26% | ||
| AVAH - MCVEF | 3% Poorly correlated | +0.12% | ||
| INNV - MCVEF | 3% Poorly correlated | -10.02% | ||
| LFST - MCVEF | 1% Poorly correlated | -0.16% | ||
| LTGHF - MCVEF | 0% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||