MLFNF
Price
$14.65
Change
-$0.35 (-2.33%)
Updated
Dec 18 closing price
NCHEY
Price
$12.10
Change
+$1.10 (+10.00%)
Updated
Aug 7 closing price
Ad is loading...

MLFNF vs NCHEY

Header iconMLFNF vs NCHEY Comparison
Open Charts MLFNF vs NCHEYBanner chart's image
Maple Leaf Foods
Price$14.65
Change-$0.35 (-2.33%)
Volume$996
CapitalizationN/A
Nichirei
Price$12.10
Change+$1.10 (+10.00%)
Volume$319
CapitalizationN/A
MLFNF vs NCHEY Comparison Chart
Loading...
MLFNF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
MLFNF vs. NCHEY commentary
Dec 19, 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 MLFNF is a Hold and NCHEY is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (MLFNF: $14.65 vs. NCHEY: $12.10)
Brand notoriety: MLFNF and NCHEY are both not notable
Both companies represent the Food: Specialty/Candy industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: MLFNF: 28% vs. NCHEY: 100%
Market capitalization -- MLFNF: $2.53B vs. NCHEY: $3.43B
MLFNF [@Food: Specialty/Candy] is valued at $2.53B. NCHEY’s [@Food: Specialty/Candy] market capitalization is $3.43B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Food: Specialty/Candy] industry ranges from $327.81B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Food: Specialty/Candy] industry is $9.09B.

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).

MLFNF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileNCHEY’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • MLFNF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • NCHEY’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, MLFNF is a better buy in the long-term than NCHEY.

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.

MLFNF’s TA Score shows that 5 TA indicator(s) are bullish.

  • MLFNF’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 5 bearish.

Price Growth

MLFNF (@Food: Specialty/Candy) experienced а -8.63% price change this week, while NCHEY (@Food: Specialty/Candy) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Food: Specialty/Candy industry was -2.41%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.62%, and the average quarterly price growth was +15.12%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Food: Specialty/Candy (-2.41% 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.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NCHEY($3.44B) has a higher market cap than MLFNF($2.53B). MLFNF has higher P/E ratio than NCHEY: MLFNF (555.56) vs NCHEY (19.39). NCHEY YTD gains are higher at: -5.543 vs. MLFNF (-20.990). NCHEY has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 38.6B vs. MLFNF (-67.46M). NCHEY has more cash in the bank: 44.4B vs. MLFNF (79.4M). MLFNF has less debt than NCHEY: MLFNF (1.93B) vs NCHEY (128B). NCHEY has higher revenues than MLFNF: NCHEY (676B) vs MLFNF (4.79B).
MLFNFNCHEYMLFNF / NCHEY
Capitalization2.53B3.44B74%
EBITDA-67.46M38.6B-0%
Gain YTD-20.990-5.543379%
P/E Ratio555.5619.392,866%
Revenue4.79B676B1%
Total Cash79.4M44.4B0%
Total Debt1.93B128B2%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
MLFNF vs NCHEY: Fundamental Ratings
MLFNF
NCHEY
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8545
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
16
Undervalued
98
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
8798
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
7571
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9862
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50n/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.

MLFNF's Valuation (16) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for NCHEY (98). This means that MLFNF’s stock grew significantly faster than NCHEY’s over the last 12 months.

MLFNF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as NCHEY (100). This means that MLFNF’s stock grew similarly to NCHEY’s over the last 12 months.

MLFNF's SMR Rating (87) in the null industry is in the same range as NCHEY (98). This means that MLFNF’s stock grew similarly to NCHEY’s over the last 12 months.

NCHEY's Price Growth Rating (71) in the null industry is in the same range as MLFNF (75). This means that NCHEY’s stock grew similarly to MLFNF’s over the last 12 months.

NCHEY's P/E Growth Rating (62) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MLFNF (98). This means that NCHEY’s stock grew somewhat faster than MLFNF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
MLFNFNCHEY
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
77%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
69%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
51%
N/A
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
54%
N/A
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
9%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
55%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
8%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 22 days ago
62%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
58%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
70%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
MLFNF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
RIVKX16.92-0.02
-0.12%
American Funds International Vntg R-4
PIIDX14.70-0.02
-0.14%
Principal International Equity R-6
AGGNX12.89-0.07
-0.53%
American Century Global Gold I
WBBIX10.18-0.06
-0.59%
TETON Westwood Balanced I
VPADX91.02-0.56
-0.61%
Vanguard Pacific Stock Index Admiral

MLFNF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MLFNF and BRCC have been poorly correlated (+24% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MLFNF and BRCC's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MLFNF
1D Price
Change %
MLFNF100%
-1.25%
BRCC - MLFNF
24%
Poorly correlated
+1.69%
SGLJF - MLFNF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
NCRA - MLFNF
7%
Poorly correlated
+30.64%
MRRTY - MLFNF
2%
Poorly correlated
-9.69%
NCHEY - MLFNF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

NCHEY and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that NCHEY and LYSFF have been poorly correlated (+7% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that NCHEY and LYSFF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To NCHEY
1D Price
Change %
NCHEY100%
N/A
LYSFF - NCHEY
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LDSVF - NCHEY
2%
Poorly correlated
+0.23%
MLFNF - NCHEY
1%
Poorly correlated
-1.25%
NFPDF - NCHEY
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
LYSFY - NCHEY
-0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More