Ad is loading...
MCHVF
Price
$1.05
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 14 closing price
PBTHF
Price
$0.60
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Nov 13 closing price
Ad is loading...

MCHVF vs PBTHF

Header iconMCHVF vs PBTHF Comparison
Open Charts MCHVF vs PBTHFBanner chart's image
MGM China Holdings
Price$1.05
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$400
CapitalizationN/A
PointsBet Holdings
Price$0.60
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$500
CapitalizationN/A
MCHVF vs PBTHF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
MCHVF vs. PBTHF commentary
Nov 18, 2024

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 MCHVF is a Hold and PBTHF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (MCHVF: $1.05 vs. PBTHF: $0.60)
Brand notoriety: MCHVF and PBTHF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Casinos/Gaming industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: MCHVF: 96% vs. PBTHF: 6%
Market capitalization -- MCHVF: $5.04B vs. PBTHF: $346.1M
MCHVF [@Casinos/Gaming] is valued at $5.04B. PBTHF’s [@Casinos/Gaming] market capitalization is $346.1M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Casinos/Gaming] industry ranges from $38.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Casinos/Gaming] industry is $5.82B.

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).

MCHVF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whilePBTHF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • MCHVF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • PBTHF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, PBTHF is a better buy in the long-term than MCHVF.

Price Growth

MCHVF (@Casinos/Gaming) experienced а -23.36% price change this week, while PBTHF (@Casinos/Gaming) price change was +10.09% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Casinos/Gaming industry was -2.41%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.78%, and the average quarterly price growth was -0.43%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Casinos/Gaming (-2.41% weekly)

Casinos/Gaming includes companies that operate casinos, gaming services, horse racing and harness racing facilities. Think Las Vegas Sands Corp., MGM Resorts International and Wynn Resorts, Ltd. In periods of strong economic growth, consumers tend to spend on discretionary/leisure activities like gambling or games; but consumption is likely to slow down when there’s economic sluggishness.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
MCHVF($5.04B) has a higher market cap than PBTHF($346M). PBTHF YTD gains are higher at: -2.344 vs. MCHVF (-16.000). PBTHF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): -260.08M vs. MCHVF (-1.06B). MCHVF has more cash in the bank: 6.95B vs. PBTHF (520M). PBTHF has less debt than MCHVF: PBTHF (17.7M) vs MCHVF (30.6B). MCHVF has higher revenues than PBTHF: MCHVF (7.92B) vs PBTHF (335M).
MCHVFPBTHFMCHVF / PBTHF
Capitalization5.04B346M1,456%
EBITDA-1.06B-260.08M406%
Gain YTD-16.000-2.344683%
P/E RatioN/AN/A-
Revenue7.92B335M2,363%
Total Cash6.95B520M1,336%
Total Debt30.6B17.7M172,881%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
MCHVF: Fundamental Ratings
MCHVF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
17
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
100
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
88
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
98
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
15

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
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
OAYIX25.430.10
+0.39%
Oakmark International Advisor
GKIRX26.39-0.10
-0.38%
Goldman Sachs Income Builder Inv
LKSCX22.78-0.28
-1.21%
LKCM Small Cap Equity Instl
HBMCX26.91-0.37
-1.36%
Hartford MidCap HLS IB
LUSIX11.57-0.17
-1.45%
Lazard US Systematic Small Cap Eq Ins

MCHVF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MCHVF has been loosely correlated with SKYZF. These tickers have moved in lockstep 35% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MCHVF jumps, then SKYZF could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MCHVF
1D Price
Change %
MCHVF100%
N/A
SKYZF - MCHVF
35%
Loosely correlated
N/A
SCHYF - MCHVF
32%
Poorly correlated
-9.65%
MCHVY - MCHVF
17%
Poorly correlated
-8.41%
GXYYY - MCHVF
16%
Poorly correlated
-0.17%
GXYEF - MCHVF
15%
Poorly correlated
-1.76%
More

PBTHF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that PBTHF and MCHVF have been poorly correlated (+4% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PBTHF and MCHVF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To PBTHF
1D Price
Change %
PBTHF100%
N/A
MCHVF - PBTHF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FLUT - PBTHF
3%
Poorly correlated
-0.58%
RANKF - PBTHF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PYTCY - PBTHF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PBKOF - PBTHF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More