RBGPF
Price
$60.04
Change
+$0.46 (+0.77%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
53.84B
UNCHF
Price
$7.84
Change
-$0.28 (-3.45%)
Updated
Jan 17 closing price
Capitalization
22.13B
Ad is loading...

RBGPF vs UNCHF

Header iconRBGPF vs UNCHF Comparison
Open Charts RBGPF vs UNCHFBanner chart's image
Reckitt Benckiser Group
Price$60.04
Change+$0.46 (+0.77%)
Volume$8.36K
Capitalization53.84B
Unicharm
Price$7.84
Change-$0.28 (-3.45%)
Volume$18.52K
Capitalization22.13B
RBGPF vs UNCHF Comparison Chart
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
Jan 19, 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 Hold and UNCHF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 19, 2025
Stock price -- (RBGPF: $60.04 vs. UNCHF: $7.84)
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: 360% vs. UNCHF: 81%
Market capitalization -- RBGPF: $53.84B vs. UNCHF: $22.13B
RBGPF [@Household/Personal Care] is valued at $53.84B. UNCHF’s [@Household/Personal Care] market capitalization is $22.13B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Household/Personal Care] industry ranges from $381.78B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Household/Personal Care] industry is $25.31B.

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 1 FA rating(s) are green whileUNCHF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • RBGPF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 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 3 TA indicator(s) are bullish while UNCHF’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • RBGPF’s TA Score: 3 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • UNCHF’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 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 -0.74% price change this week, while UNCHF (@Household/Personal Care) price change was -2.21% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Household/Personal Care industry was +1.23%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -1.66%, and the average quarterly price growth was -8.98%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Household/Personal Care (+1.23% 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($53.8B) has a higher market cap than UNCHF($22.1B). UNCHF has higher P/E ratio than RBGPF: UNCHF (46.30) vs RBGPF (18.48). UNCHF YTD gains are higher at: 4.600 vs. RBGPF (1.727). UNCHF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 160B vs. RBGPF (3.9B). UNCHF has more cash in the bank: 312B vs. RBGPF (1.03B). RBGPF has less debt than UNCHF: RBGPF (8.64B) vs UNCHF (29.1B). UNCHF has higher revenues than RBGPF: UNCHF (914B) vs RBGPF (15B).
RBGPFUNCHFRBGPF / UNCHF
Capitalization53.8B22.1B243%
EBITDA3.9B160B2%
Gain YTD1.7274.60038%
P/E Ratio18.4846.3040%
Revenue15B914B2%
Total Cash1.03B312B0%
Total Debt8.64B29.1B30%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
RBGPF vs UNCHF: Fundamental Ratings
RBGPF
UNCHF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
343
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
18
Undervalued
54
Fair valued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100100
SMR RATING
1..100
9759
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
5883
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
3481
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/an/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.

RBGPF's Valuation (18) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for UNCHF (54). This means that RBGPF’s stock grew somewhat faster than 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 (59) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for RBGPF (97). This means that UNCHF’s stock grew somewhat faster than RBGPF’s over the last 12 months.

RBGPF's Price Growth Rating (58) in the null industry is in the same range as UNCHF (83). This means that RBGPF’s stock grew similarly to UNCHF’s over the last 12 months.

RBGPF's P/E Growth Rating (34) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for UNCHF (81). This means that RBGPF’s stock grew somewhat faster than UNCHF’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RBGPFUNCHF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
72%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
65%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
59%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
56%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
66%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
53%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
63%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
57%
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
57%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
51%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
65%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 20 days ago
59%
Bullish Trend 16 days ago
54%
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
57%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
N/A
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
50%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 11 days ago
65%
Bearish Trend 11 days ago
66%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
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
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
MUOCX28.220.31
+1.11%
Morgan Stanley Instl US Core C
JAWWX111.471.00
+0.91%
Janus Henderson Global Research T
DAVPX36.840.26
+0.71%
Davenport Core Leaders Fund
RNPEX62.170.40
+0.65%
American Funds New Perspective R4
NWHDX15.470.09
+0.59%
Nationwide Bailard Cogntv Val A

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%
+0.76%
RBGLY - RBGPF
69%
Closely correlated
+1.50%
UNLRF - RBGPF
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
UNCHF - RBGPF
20%
Poorly correlated
-3.43%
SPCO - RBGPF
19%
Poorly correlated
N/A
UNICY - RBGPF
10%
Poorly correlated
-19.39%
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%
-3.43%
UNICY - UNCHF
41%
Loosely correlated
-19.39%
UNLYF - UNCHF
22%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RBGPF - UNCHF
20%
Poorly correlated
+0.76%
SSDOY - UNCHF
16%
Poorly correlated
+1.83%
SPCO - UNCHF
7%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More