MCHVF
Price
$2.05
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Aug 20 closing price
Capitalization
7.81B
PBTHF
Price
$0.40
Change
-$0.45 (-52.94%)
Updated
Aug 27 closing price
Capitalization
284.46M
Interact to see
Advertisement

MCHVF vs PBTHF

Header iconMCHVF vs PBTHF Comparison
Open Charts MCHVF vs PBTHFBanner chart's image
MGM China Holdings
Price$2.05
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$200
Capitalization7.81B
PointsBet Holdings
Price$0.40
Change-$0.45 (-52.94%)
Volume$2K
Capitalization284.46M
MCHVF vs PBTHF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
MCHVF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
PBTHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
MCHVF vs. PBTHF commentary
Aug 29, 2025

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 Buy and PBTHF is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 29, 2025
Stock price -- (MCHVF: $2.05 vs. PBTHF: $0.40)
Brand notoriety: MCHVF and PBTHF are both not notable
MCHVF represents the Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines, while PBTHF is part of the Casinos/Gaming industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: MCHVF: 25% vs. PBTHF: 47%
Market capitalization -- MCHVF: $7.81B vs. PBTHF: $284.46M
MCHVF [@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines] is valued at $7.81B. PBTHF’s [@Casinos/Gaming] market capitalization is $284.46M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines] industry ranges from $39.62B to $0. The market cap for tickers in the [@Casinos/Gaming] industry ranges from $54.24B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines] industry is $5.87B. The average market capitalization across the [@Casinos/Gaming] industry is $5.57B.

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 2 FA rating(s) are green whilePBTHF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).

  • MCHVF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • PBTHF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
According to our system of comparison, MCHVF is a better buy in the long-term than PBTHF.

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.

MCHVF’s TA Score shows that 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while PBTHF’s TA Score has 2 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • MCHVF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 2 bearish.
  • PBTHF’s TA Score: 2 bullish, 7 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, MCHVF is a better buy in the short-term than PBTHF.

Price Growth

MCHVF (@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while PBTHF (@Casinos/Gaming) price change was -53.53% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines industry was +3.84%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.87%, and the average quarterly price growth was +12.76%.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Casinos/Gaming industry was +0.17%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.28%, and the average quarterly price growth was +17.66%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Hotels/Resorts/Cruiselines (+3.84% weekly)

The industry includes companies that operate and manage one or more of the following: lodging facilities (e.g. hotels and motels), resorts (e.g. ski resorts), spas, cruise ships and timeshare facilities. Marriott International, Inc., Carnival Corporation, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. and Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. are some of the biggest names in this industry.

@Casinos/Gaming (+0.17% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
MCHVF($7.81B) has a higher market cap than PBTHF($284M). MCHVF has higher P/E ratio than PBTHF: MCHVF (14.15) vs PBTHF (4.20). MCHVF YTD gains are higher at: 95.238 vs. PBTHF (-35.563).
MCHVFPBTHFMCHVF / PBTHF
Capitalization7.81B284M2,751%
EBITDAN/A4.35M-
Gain YTD95.238-35.563-268%
P/E Ratio14.154.20337%
RevenueN/A252M-
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total DebtN/AN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
MCHVF vs PBTHF: Fundamental Ratings
MCHVF
PBTHF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
3416
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
23
Undervalued
1
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
60100
SMR RATING
1..100
10096
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3937
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3386
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
6550

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.

PBTHF's Valuation (1) in the null industry is in the same range as MCHVF (23). This means that PBTHF’s stock grew similarly to MCHVF’s over the last 12 months.

MCHVF's Profit vs Risk Rating (60) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for PBTHF (100). This means that MCHVF’s stock grew somewhat faster than PBTHF’s over the last 12 months.

PBTHF's SMR Rating (96) in the null industry is in the same range as MCHVF (100). This means that PBTHF’s stock grew similarly to MCHVF’s over the last 12 months.

PBTHF's Price Growth Rating (37) in the null industry is in the same range as MCHVF (39). This means that PBTHF’s stock grew similarly to MCHVF’s over the last 12 months.

MCHVF's P/E Growth Rating (33) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for PBTHF (86). This means that MCHVF’s stock grew somewhat faster than PBTHF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
MCHVFPBTHF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
70%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
50%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
73%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
57%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
80%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
62%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
84%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
52%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
87%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 24 days ago
80%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 14 days ago
86%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
84%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
46%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
88%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
MCHVF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
PBTHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
DMAT20.330.11
+0.57%
Global X Disruptive Materials ETF
INFL42.700.11
+0.26%
Horizon Kinetics Inflation Bnfcrs ETF
RSPC38.990.08
+0.21%
Invesco S&P 500® Eql Wght Comm Svcs ETF
YBTC45.96-0.02
-0.04%
Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Cll Strat ETF
EUAD41.86-0.34
-0.81%
Select STOXX Europe Aerospace & Defense ETF

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
N/A
MCHVY - MCHVF
17%
Poorly correlated
N/A
GXYYY - MCHVF
16%
Poorly correlated
-3.55%
GXYEF - MCHVF
15%
Poorly correlated
N/A
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%
-53.53%
MCHVF - PBTHF
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FLUT - PBTHF
3%
Poorly correlated
+1.50%
RANKF - PBTHF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PYTCY - PBTHF
2%
Poorly correlated
N/A
PBKOF - PBTHF
2%
Poorly correlated
-5.35%
More