LYSFF vs MAMA
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 LYSFF is a Hold and MAMA 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).
LYSFF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileMAMA’s FA Score has 3 green FA rating(s).
- LYSFF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- MAMA’s FA Score: 3 green, 2 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.
LYSFF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while MAMA’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- LYSFF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 3 bearish.
- MAMA’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
Price Growth
LYSFF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while MAMA (@Food: Specialty/Candy) price change was -13.88% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food: Specialty/Candy industry was -1.68%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.65%, and the average quarterly price growth was +17.95%.
Reported Earning Dates
MAMA is expected to report earnings on Apr 23, 2025.
Industries' Descriptions
@Food: Specialty/Candy (-1.68% weekly)A specialty/candy manufacturer specializes in one or more of the following: chocolate, candies, pasta, condiments, seasonings, among other items. Hershey Company, McCormick & Company and J.M. Smucker Company are some of the major firms in this segment. Demand for this industry’s products comes from both institutions/restaurants as well as households.
| LYSFF | MAMA | LYSFF / MAMA | |
| Capitalization | 2.49B | 187M | 1,330% |
| EBITDA | 6.12B | 9.86M | 61,999% |
| Gain YTD | 21.636 | 68.024 | 32% |
| P/E Ratio | 7.93 | 26.24 | 30% |
| Revenue | 28.1B | 96.4M | 29,149% |
| Total Cash | 3.59B | 5.56M | 64,478% |
| Total Debt | 9.44B | 15.2M | 62,132% |
LYSFF | MAMA | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 97 | 78 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 12 Undervalued | 91 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 5 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 65 | 28 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 46 | 36 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 100 | 3 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 75 | 95 |
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.
LYSFF's Valuation (12) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for MAMA (91). This means that LYSFF’s stock grew significantly faster than MAMA’s over the last 12 months.
MAMA's Profit vs Risk Rating (5) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for LYSFF (100). This means that MAMA’s stock grew significantly faster than LYSFF’s over the last 12 months.
MAMA's SMR Rating (28) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for LYSFF (65). This means that MAMA’s stock grew somewhat faster than LYSFF’s over the last 12 months.
MAMA's Price Growth Rating (36) in the null industry is in the same range as LYSFF (46). This means that MAMA’s stock grew similarly to LYSFF’s over the last 12 months.
MAMA's P/E Growth Rating (3) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for LYSFF (100). This means that MAMA’s stock grew significantly faster than LYSFF’s over the last 12 months.
| LYSFF | MAMA | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 35% | 2 days ago 90% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 58% | 2 days ago 83% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 39% | 2 days ago 79% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 44% | 2 days ago 88% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 43% | 2 days ago 81% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 2 days ago 41% | 2 days ago 80% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | N/A | 20 days ago 80% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | N/A | 10 days ago 78% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 90% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | 2 days ago 82% |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| MFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| ABAEX | 8.67 | -0.01 | -0.12% |
| AB Emerging Markets Multi-Asset A | |||
| RSIPX | 15.16 | -0.06 | -0.39% |
| Columbia Disciplined Core Inst2 | |||
| EIVCX | 13.01 | -0.09 | -0.69% |
| Allspring Special Large Cap Value C | |||
| IEFCX | 23.40 | -0.17 | -0.72% |
| Invesco Energy C | |||
| RYWAX | 53.58 | -0.79 | -1.45% |
| Rydex S&P SmallCap 600 Pure Growth H | |||
LYSFF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that LYSFF and CVNZF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that LYSFF and CVNZF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To LYSFF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LYSFF | 100% | N/A | ||
| CVNZF - LYSFF | 30% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| LSF - LYSFF | 20% Poorly correlated | -2.29% | ||
| MAMA - LYSFF | 12% Poorly correlated | -14.95% | ||
| NCHEY - LYSFF | 7% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| KRYAY - LYSFF | 3% Poorly correlated | +0.90% | ||
More | ||||
MAMA and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that MAMA and NOMD have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MAMA and NOMD's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MAMA | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAMA | 100% | -14.95% | ||
| NOMD - MAMA | 24% Poorly correlated | -0.35% | ||
| DAR - MAMA | 24% Poorly correlated | +4.19% | ||
| NATR - MAMA | 24% Poorly correlated | -0.32% | ||
| USNA - MAMA | 23% Poorly correlated | -1.14% | ||
| LANC - MAMA | 22% Poorly correlated | -2.13% | ||
More | ||||