NWYF
Price
$34.50
Change
-$1.21 (-3.39%)
Updated
Dec 18 closing price
UNIB
Price
$16.85
Change
-$0.15 (-0.88%)
Updated
Dec 16 closing price
Ad is loading...

NWYF vs UNIB

Header iconNWYF vs UNIB Comparison
Open Charts NWYF vs UNIBBanner chart's image
Northway Financial
Price$34.50
Change-$1.21 (-3.39%)
Volume$5.66K
CapitalizationN/A
University Ban
Price$16.85
Change-$0.15 (-0.88%)
Volume$776
CapitalizationN/A
NWYF vs UNIB Comparison Chart
Loading...
NWYF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
UNIB
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
NWYF vs. UNIB 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 NWYF is a Hold and UNIB is a Buy.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Dec 19, 2024
Stock price -- (NWYF: $34.50 vs. UNIB: $16.85)
Brand notoriety: NWYF and UNIB are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: NWYF: 358% vs. UNIB: 20%
Market capitalization -- NWYF: $50.22M vs. UNIB: $68.52M
NWYF [@Regional Banks] is valued at $50.22M. UNIB’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $68.52M. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $133.96B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $5.88B.

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).

NWYF’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileUNIB’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

NWYF’s TA Score shows that 1 TA indicator(s) are bullish while UNIB’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • NWYF’s TA Score: 1 bullish, 5 bearish.
  • UNIB’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 3 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, UNIB is a better buy in the short-term than NWYF.

Price Growth

NWYF (@Regional Banks) experienced а -6.76% price change this week, while UNIB (@Regional Banks) price change was +0.18% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -3.34%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.11%, and the average quarterly price growth was +19.80%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (-3.34% weekly)

Regional banks have a smaller reach than major banks, and cater mostly to one region of a country, such as a state or within a group of states. They offer services often similar – albeit with some limitations/smaller scale – compared to major banks. Taking deposits, making loans, mortgages, leases, credit cards , fund management, insurance and investment banking. SunTrust Banks, State Street Corp., M&T Bank Corp. are some examples of U.S. regional banks.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
UNIB($68.5M) has a higher market cap than NWYF($50.2M). UNIB (19.05) and NWYF (18.66) have similar P/E ratio . NWYF YTD gains are higher at: 102.682 vs. UNIB (12.333). UNIB has higher revenues than NWYF: UNIB (128M) vs NWYF (39.4M).
NWYFUNIBNWYF / UNIB
Capitalization50.2M68.5M73%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD102.68212.333833%
P/E Ratio18.6619.0598%
Revenue39.4M128M31%
Total CashN/AN/A-
Total Debt20.6MN/A-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
NWYF vs UNIB: Fundamental Ratings
NWYF
UNIB
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
8230
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
63
Fair valued
21
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
6233
SMR RATING
1..100
5560
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3747
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
7376
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a50

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.

UNIB's Valuation (21) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for NWYF (63). This means that UNIB’s stock grew somewhat faster than NWYF’s over the last 12 months.

UNIB's Profit vs Risk Rating (33) in the null industry is in the same range as NWYF (62). This means that UNIB’s stock grew similarly to NWYF’s over the last 12 months.

NWYF's SMR Rating (55) in the null industry is in the same range as UNIB (60). This means that NWYF’s stock grew similarly to UNIB’s over the last 12 months.

NWYF's Price Growth Rating (37) in the null industry is in the same range as UNIB (47). This means that NWYF’s stock grew similarly to UNIB’s over the last 12 months.

NWYF's P/E Growth Rating (73) in the null industry is in the same range as UNIB (76). This means that NWYF’s stock grew similarly to UNIB’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
NWYFUNIB
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
26%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
37%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
26%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
37%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
33%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
42%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
30%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
40%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
31%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
43%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
39%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
49%
Advances
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 10 days ago
36%
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
35%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
41%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
45%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
NWYF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
UNIB
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
CLBT20.410.18
+0.89%
Cellebrite DI Ltd
EXEL33.66-1.03
-2.97%
Exelixis
ASNS1.03-0.04
-3.74%
Actelis Networks
CDNA20.40-1.74
-7.86%
CareDx
KRMD3.70-0.42
-10.19%
KORU Medical Systems

NWYF and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To NWYF
1D Price
Change %
NWYF100%
-0.89%
EVBN - NWYF
30%
Poorly correlated
-2.03%
CIBN - NWYF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
KGTFY - NWYF
29%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FBTT - NWYF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
UNIB - NWYF
25%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

UNIB and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that UNIB and NWYF have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that UNIB and NWYF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To UNIB
1D Price
Change %
UNIB100%
N/A
NWYF - UNIB
25%
Poorly correlated
-3.38%
PSBQ - UNIB
23%
Poorly correlated
N/A
WCFB - UNIB
21%
Poorly correlated
N/A
UBAB - UNIB
10%
Poorly correlated
-1.72%
UOVEF - UNIB
6%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More