MNODF vs UPMKF
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 MNODF is a Hold and UPMKF 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).
MNODF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileUPMKF’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- MNODF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- UPMKF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Price Growth
MNODF (@Pulp & Paper) experienced а -15.31% price change this week, while UPMKF (@Pulp & Paper) price change was +0.85% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Pulp & Paper industry was -2.52%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -3.58%, and the average quarterly price growth was -10.57%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Pulp & Paper (-2.52% weekly)The pulp and paper industry includes companies that make pulp and process pulp into paper and specialty paper products. Companies in this industry also operate paper mills. The industry’s products have wide array of markets including books, magazines, envelopes, containerboard, and food and beverage packaging. Domtar Corporation, Schweitzer-Mauduit International, Inc. and Neenah Inc. are some of the major pulp & paper companies.
| MNODF | UPMKF | MNODF / UPMKF | |
| Capitalization | N/A | 17.7B | - |
| EBITDA | N/A | 2.28B | - |
| Gain YTD | -25.014 | -24.401 | 103% |
| P/E Ratio | N/A | 11.93 | - |
| Revenue | N/A | 12B | - |
| Total Cash | N/A | 886M | - |
| Total Debt | N/A | 3.63B | - |
MNODF | UPMKF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 10 Undervalued | 12 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 92 | 77 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 84 | 79 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 40 | 95 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 85 | 65 |
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.
MNODF's Valuation (10) in the null industry is in the same range as UPMKF (12). This means that MNODF’s stock grew similarly to UPMKF’s over the last 12 months.
MNODF's Profit vs Risk Rating (100) in the null industry is in the same range as UPMKF (100). This means that MNODF’s stock grew similarly to UPMKF’s over the last 12 months.
UPMKF's SMR Rating (77) in the null industry is in the same range as MNODF (92). This means that UPMKF’s stock grew similarly to MNODF’s over the last 12 months.
UPMKF's Price Growth Rating (79) in the null industry is in the same range as MNODF (84). This means that UPMKF’s stock grew similarly to MNODF’s over the last 12 months.
MNODF's P/E Growth Rating (40) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for UPMKF (95). This means that MNODF’s stock grew somewhat faster than UPMKF’s over the last 12 months.
| RSI ODDS (%) |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) |
| Momentum ODDS (%) |
| MACD ODDS (%) |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) |
| Advances ODDS (%) |
| Declines ODDS (%) |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) |
| Aroon ODDS (%) |
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| XTRE | 48.86 | 0.07 | +0.14% |
| BondBloxx Bloomberg ThreeYrTrgDurUSTrETF | |||
| DBC | 21.82 | -0.11 | -0.50% |
| Invesco DB Commodity Tracking | |||
| LDEM | 46.66 | -0.27 | -0.58% |
| iShares® ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF | |||
| CADEUR | 0.67 | -0.01 | -0.76% |
| Canadian Dollar - Euro | |||
| IETC | 80.90 | -2.02 | -2.43% |
| iShares U.S. Tech Independence Fcs ETF | |||
MNODF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that MNODF and POELF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MNODF and POELF's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MNODF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MNODF | 100% | N/A | ||
| POELF - MNODF | 30% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| UPMKF - MNODF | 21% Poorly correlated | +6.92% | ||
| UPMMY - MNODF | 20% Poorly correlated | +1.33% | ||
| SLVM - MNODF | 7% Poorly correlated | +0.43% | ||
| HLMMF - MNODF | 6% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||
UPMKF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, UPMKF has been loosely correlated with UPMMY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 36% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if UPMKF jumps, then UPMMY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To UPMKF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UPMKF | 100% | +6.92% | ||
| UPMMY - UPMKF | 36% Loosely correlated | +1.33% | ||
| SEOAY - UPMKF | 26% Poorly correlated | -1.52% | ||
| MNODF - UPMKF | 22% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SUZ - UPMKF | 10% Poorly correlated | +1.43% | ||
| ITP - UPMKF | 10% Poorly correlated | -1.57% | ||
More | ||||