LTGHY vs MFCSF
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 LTGHY is a Hold and MFCSF 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).
LTGHY’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMFCSF’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- LTGHY’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- MFCSF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
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.
LTGHY’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish.
- LTGHY’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
LTGHY (@Medical/Nursing Services) experienced а -3.10% price change this week, while MFCSF (@Medical/Nursing Services) price change was +7.35% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Medical/Nursing Services industry was -3.60%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.82%, and the average quarterly price growth was +1650.84%.
Reported Earning Dates
MFCSF is expected to report earnings on Mar 13, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Medical/Nursing Services (-3.60% 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.
| LTGHY | MFCSF | LTGHY / MFCSF | |
| Capitalization | 1.7B | 164M | 1,038% |
| EBITDA | 3.3B | 56M | 5,900% |
| Gain YTD | 48.282 | 65.450 | 74% |
| P/E Ratio | 20.04 | 23.87 | 84% |
| Revenue | 30B | 433M | 6,928% |
| Total Cash | N/A | 35.3M | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 139M | - |
LTGHY | MFCSF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 81 | 66 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 13 Undervalued | 18 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 30 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 95 | 55 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 40 | 42 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 80 | 32 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
LTGHY's Valuation (13) in the null industry is in the same range as MFCSF (18). This means that LTGHY’s stock grew similarly to MFCSF’s over the last 12 months.
MFCSF's Profit vs Risk Rating (30) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for LTGHY (100). This means that MFCSF’s stock grew significantly faster than LTGHY’s over the last 12 months.
MFCSF's SMR Rating (55) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LTGHY (95). This means that MFCSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LTGHY’s over the last 12 months.
LTGHY's Price Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is in the same range as MFCSF (42). This means that LTGHY’s stock grew similarly to MFCSF’s over the last 12 months.
MFCSF's P/E Growth Rating (32) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LTGHY (80). This means that MFCSF’s stock grew somewhat faster than LTGHY’s over the last 12 months.
| LTGHY | |
|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 83% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 73% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | N/A |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 71% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 70% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 7 days ago 70% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 61% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 86% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 71% |
LTGHY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LTGHY and ASTH have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LTGHY and ASTH's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LTGHY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LTGHY | 100% | -0.55% | ||
| ASTH - LTGHY | 20% Poorly correlated | -0.02% | ||
| LWSCF - LTGHY | 16% Poorly correlated | -1.76% | ||
| HLYK - LTGHY | 4% Poorly correlated | +3.45% | ||
| JRSS - LTGHY | 3% Poorly correlated | -61.17% | ||
| NVLPF - LTGHY | 2% Poorly correlated | +12.27% | ||
More | ||||
MFCSF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that MFCSF and LWSCF have been poorly correlated (+16% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MFCSF and LWSCF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MFCSF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MFCSF | 100% | +3.50% | ||
| LWSCF - MFCSF | 16% Poorly correlated | -1.76% | ||
| HLYK - MFCSF | 9% Poorly correlated | +3.45% | ||
| ORPEF - MFCSF | 3% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LTGHY - MFCSF | 1% Poorly correlated | -0.55% | ||
| KJFI - MFCSF | 1% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||