RBGPF
Price
$75.92
Change
+$2.84 (+3.89%)
Updated
Aug 15 closing price
Capitalization
50.36B
UNCHF
Price
$6.67
Change
+$0.20 (+3.09%)
Updated
Aug 13 closing price
Capitalization
11.74B
Interact to see
Advertisement

RBGPF vs UNCHF

Header iconRBGPF vs UNCHF Comparison
Open Charts RBGPF vs UNCHFBanner chart's image
Reckitt Benckiser Group
Price$75.92
Change+$2.84 (+3.89%)
Volume$759
Capitalization50.36B
Unicharm
Price$6.67
Change+$0.20 (+3.09%)
Volume$2.42K
Capitalization11.74B
RBGPF vs UNCHF Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
RBGPF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
UNCHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
RBGPF vs. UNCHF commentary
Aug 16, 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 RBGPF is a Buy and UNCHF is a Buy.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
Aug 16, 2025
Stock price -- (RBGPF: $75.92 vs. UNCHF: $6.67)
Brand notoriety: RBGPF and UNCHF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Household/Personal Care industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: RBGPF: 95% vs. UNCHF: 19%
Market capitalization -- RBGPF: $50.36B vs. UNCHF: $11.74B
RBGPF [@Household/Personal Care] is valued at $50.36B. UNCHF’s [@Household/Personal Care] market capitalization is $11.74B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Household/Personal Care] industry ranges from $361.57B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Household/Personal Care] industry is $21.49B.

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).

RBGPF’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileUNCHF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

RBGPF’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while UNCHF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

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

Price Growth

RBGPF (@Household/Personal Care) experienced а +3.88% price change this week, while UNCHF (@Household/Personal Care) price change was +1.37% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Household/Personal Care industry was +1.34%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.41%, and the average quarterly price growth was +4.99%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Household/Personal Care (+1.34% weekly)

Household/Personal Care companies sell products for home cleaning and/or personal hygiene and grooming purposes. Products of this industry include detergents, shampoos, soaps, cosmetics, fabric conditioners and infant care fragrances. Procter & Gamble, Unilever, Estee Lauder and Colgate-Palmolive are some of the biggest names in the business. A lot of the products become a necessary part of people’s daily routine, and therefore the industry is relatively less vulnerable to macroeconomic downturns. At the same time, product quality, consumer safety, and ease of use are extremely critical factors for a company to survive competition and earn recognition in this industry.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RBGPF($50.4B) has a higher market cap than UNCHF($11.7B). RBGPF has higher P/E ratio than UNCHF: RBGPF (30.46) vs UNCHF (20.65). RBGPF YTD gains are higher at: 28.628 vs. UNCHF (-11.067). UNCHF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 189B vs. RBGPF (2.77B). UNCHF has more cash in the bank: 347B vs. RBGPF (963M). RBGPF has less debt than UNCHF: RBGPF (9.29B) vs UNCHF (24.9B). UNCHF has higher revenues than RBGPF: UNCHF (980B) vs RBGPF (14B).
RBGPFUNCHFRBGPF / UNCHF
Capitalization50.4B11.7B431%
EBITDA2.77B189B1%
Gain YTD28.628-11.067-259%
P/E Ratio30.4620.65147%
Revenue14B980B1%
Total Cash963M347B0%
Total Debt9.29B24.9B37%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
RBGPF vs UNCHF: Fundamental Ratings
RBGPF
UNCHF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
3060
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
28
Undervalued
48
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
9561
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
4682
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
1491
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.

RBGPF's Valuation (28) in the null industry is in the same range as UNCHF (48). This means that RBGPF’s stock grew similarly to UNCHF’s over the last 12 months.

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

UNCHF's SMR Rating (61) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for RBGPF (95). This means that UNCHF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RBGPF’s over the last 12 months.

RBGPF's Price Growth Rating (46) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for UNCHF (82). This means that RBGPF’s stock grew somewhat faster than UNCHF’s over the last 12 months.

RBGPF's P/E Growth Rating (14) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for UNCHF (91). This means that RBGPF’s stock grew significantly faster than UNCHF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RBGPFUNCHF
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
31%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
53%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
65%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
54%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
68%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
54%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
69%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
54%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
59%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
56%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
71%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 17 days ago
58%
Bullish Trend 13 days ago
55%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
61%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
61%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
54%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
RBGPF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
UNCHF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
EET68.010.22
+0.32%
ProShares Ultra MSCI Emerging Markets
AGEM35.170.08
+0.22%
abrdn Emerging Markets Dividend Act ETF
ROUS54.98-0.17
-0.31%
Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF
LEXI33.27-0.13
-0.38%
Alexis Practical Tactical ETF
TECL105.80-2.60
-2.40%
Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X ETF

RBGPF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, RBGPF has been closely correlated with RBGLY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 69% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if RBGPF jumps, then RBGLY could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RBGPF
1D Price
Change %
RBGPF100%
+3.88%
RBGLY - RBGPF
69%
Closely correlated
+0.13%
UNLRF - RBGPF
24%
Poorly correlated
-2.27%
UNCHF - RBGPF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SPCO - RBGPF
19%
Poorly correlated
N/A
UNICY - RBGPF
10%
Poorly correlated
-1.49%
More

UNCHF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, UNCHF has been loosely correlated with UNICY. These tickers have moved in lockstep 41% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if UNCHF jumps, then UNICY could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To UNCHF
1D Price
Change %
UNCHF100%
N/A
UNICY - UNCHF
41%
Loosely correlated
-1.49%
UNLYF - UNCHF
22%
Poorly correlated
-1.95%
RBGPF - UNCHF
20%
Poorly correlated
+3.88%
SSDOY - UNCHF
16%
Poorly correlated
-0.17%
SPCO - UNCHF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More