MTYFF
Price
$31.47
Change
-$1.07 (-3.29%)
Updated
May 20 closing price
Capitalization
692.03M
SGLOF
Price
$17.82
Change
-$1.78 (-9.08%)
Updated
Dec 5 closing price
Capitalization
4.74B
Interact to see
Advertisement

MTYFF vs SGLOF

Header iconMTYFF vs SGLOF Comparison
Open Charts MTYFF vs SGLOFBanner chart's image
MTY Food Group
Price$31.47
Change-$1.07 (-3.29%)
Volume$2.61K
Capitalization692.03M
FOOD & LIFE COS
Price$17.82
Change-$1.78 (-9.08%)
Volume$131.9K
Capitalization4.74B
MTYFF vs SGLOF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
MTYFF vs. SGLOF commentary
May 23, 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 MTYFF is a Hold and SGLOF is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
May 23, 2025
Stock price -- (MTYFF: $31.47 vs. SGLOF: $17.82)
Brand notoriety: MTYFF and SGLOF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Restaurants industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: MTYFF: 199% vs. SGLOF: 100%
Market capitalization -- MTYFF: $692.03M vs. SGLOF: $4.74B
MTYFF [@Restaurants] is valued at $692.03M. SGLOF’s [@Restaurants] market capitalization is $4.74B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Restaurants] industry ranges from $224.74B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Restaurants] industry is $8.2B.

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).

MTYFF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileSGLOF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • MTYFF’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
  • SGLOF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, MTYFF is a better buy in the long-term than SGLOF.

Price Growth

MTYFF (@Restaurants) experienced а -3.47% price change this week, while SGLOF (@Restaurants) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Restaurants industry was -1.98%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +6.29%, and the average quarterly price growth was +2.21%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Restaurants (-1.98% weekly)

The industry includes companies that operate full-service restaurants, fast food restaurants, cafeterias and snack bars. McDonald`s Corporation, Starbucks Corporation, YUM! Brands, Inc. and Restaurant Brands International Inc. are some of the largest U.S. restaurant-owning companies in terms of market capitalization. While restaurant spending could be viewed as discretionary for consumers, some companies in the business have been able to weather economic cycles by establishing strong loyalty among customers over the years. Many of them also have a strong global presence as well.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
SGLOF($4.74B) has a higher market cap than MTYFF($692M). MTYFF has higher P/E ratio than SGLOF: MTYFF (118.32) vs SGLOF (29.75). SGLOF YTD gains are higher at: 0.000 vs. MTYFF (-4.201). SGLOF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 47.2B vs. MTYFF (144M). SGLOF has more cash in the bank: 58.1B vs. MTYFF (68.8M). MTYFF has less debt than SGLOF: MTYFF (1.22B) vs SGLOF (217B). SGLOF has higher revenues than MTYFF: SGLOF (334B) vs MTYFF (1.17B).
MTYFFSGLOFMTYFF / SGLOF
Capitalization692M4.74B15%
EBITDA144M47.2B0%
Gain YTD-4.2010.000-
P/E Ratio118.3229.75398%
Revenue1.17B334B0%
Total Cash68.8M58.1B0%
Total Debt1.22B217B1%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
MTYFF: Fundamental Ratings
MTYFF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
89
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
30
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
61
SMR RATING
1..100
88
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
52
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
2
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/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.

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
Interact to see
Advertisement
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
MIGDX31.02N/A
N/A
MFS Massachusetts Inv Gr Stk C
DAMDX27.17N/A
N/A
Dunham Monthly Distribution A
GTTTX29.67N/A
N/A
Goldman Sachs Small Cp Val Insghts Inv
SDGZX122.12N/A
N/A
DWS Capital Growth R6
GWSIX17.63N/A
N/A
Gabelli Focused Gr and Inc I

MTYFF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that MTYFF and WEN have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that MTYFF and WEN's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To MTYFF
1D Price
Change %
MTYFF100%
N/A
WEN - MTYFF
30%
Poorly correlated
-1.03%
QSR - MTYFF
27%
Poorly correlated
+0.01%
RICK - MTYFF
27%
Poorly correlated
-0.78%
KRUS - MTYFF
22%
Poorly correlated
-0.20%
PBPB - MTYFF
21%
Poorly correlated
-0.70%
More

SGLOF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SGLOF and RSTRF have been poorly correlated (+30% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SGLOF and RSTRF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SGLOF
1D Price
Change %
SGLOF100%
N/A
RSTRF - SGLOF
30%
Poorly correlated
N/A
BROS - SGLOF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
MTYFF - SGLOF
3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FWRG - SGLOF
1%
Poorly correlated
+2.32%
MBPFF - SGLOF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More