MURGF vs PINXY
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 MURGF is a Hold and PINXY 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).
MURGF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whilePINXY’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- MURGF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
- PINXY’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
Price Growth
MURGF (@Property/Casualty Insurance) experienced а +1.53% price change this week, while PINXY (@Property/Casualty Insurance) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Property/Casualty Insurance industry was -1.68%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.71%, and the average quarterly price growth was +9.77%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Property/Casualty Insurance (-1.68% weekly)Property and casualty companies insure against accidents of non-physical harm, such as lawsuits, damage to personal assets, car crashes and more. Progressive Corporation, Travelers Companies, Inc. and Allstate Corporation are some of the biggest providers of such products.
| MURGF | PINXY | MURGF / PINXY | |
| Capitalization | 52B | 34.5B | 151% |
| EBITDA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Gain YTD | 9.058 | 0.000 | - |
| P/E Ratio | 14.71 | 5.01 | 293% |
| Revenue | 70.3B | 615B | 11% |
| Total Cash | 5.82B | N/A | - |
| Total Debt | 4.76B | N/A | - |
MURGF | PINXY | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 50 | 50 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 38 Fair valued | 5 Undervalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 18 | 12 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 96 | 100 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 48 | 39 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 54 | 59 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | n/a | 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.
PINXY's Valuation (5) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for MURGF (38). This means that PINXY’s stock grew somewhat faster than MURGF’s over the last 12 months.
PINXY's Profit vs Risk Rating (12) in the null industry is in the same range as MURGF (18). This means that PINXY’s stock grew similarly to MURGF’s over the last 12 months.
MURGF's SMR Rating (96) in the null industry is in the same range as PINXY (100). This means that MURGF’s stock grew similarly to PINXY’s over the last 12 months.
PINXY's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is in the same range as MURGF (48). This means that PINXY’s stock grew similarly to MURGF’s over the last 12 months.
MURGF's P/E Growth Rating (54) in the null industry is in the same range as PINXY (59). This means that MURGF’s stock grew similarly to PINXY’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 % |
| DIAL | 17.79 | 0.02 | +0.11% |
| Columbia Diversified Fixed Inc Allc ETF | |||
| IWDL | 41.82 | N/A | N/A |
| ETRACS 2x Leveraged US Value Fctr TR ETN | |||
| ZSB | 13.10 | N/A | N/A |
| USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Stgy Fd | |||
| SDCI | 20.93 | -0.33 | -1.55% |
| USCF SummerHaven Dyn CmdtyStgy NoK-1 ETF | |||
| IWL | 148.47 | -2.64 | -1.75% |
| iShares Russell Top 200 ETF | |||
MURGF and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, MURGF has been loosely correlated with SSREY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 39% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if MURGF jumps, then SSREY could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To MURGF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MURGF | 100% | +2.85% | ||
| SSREY - MURGF | 39% Loosely correlated | +0.18% | ||
| HVRRY - MURGF | 37% Loosely correlated | -0.33% | ||
| MURGY - MURGF | 29% Poorly correlated | -0.46% | ||
| L - MURGF | 24% Poorly correlated | -0.27% | ||
| SIGI - MURGF | 22% Poorly correlated | -1.06% | ||
More | ||||
PINXY and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor tells us that PINXY and PPCCY have been poorly correlated (+10% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that PINXY and PPCCY's prices will move in lockstep.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To PINXY | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PINXY | 100% | N/A | ||
| PPCCY - PINXY | 10% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| MURGF - PINXY | 6% Poorly correlated | +2.85% | ||
| MURGY - PINXY | 3% Poorly correlated | -0.46% | ||
| MSADY - PINXY | 2% Poorly correlated | +0.49% | ||
| IFCZF - PINXY | -0% Poorly correlated | -0.05% | ||
More | ||||