Advertisement
RBGPF vs UNCHF
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 StrongBuy and UNCHF is a StrongBuy.
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.
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, 3 bearish.
Price Growth
RBGPF (@Household/Personal Care) experienced а -5.23% price change this week, while UNCHF (@Household/Personal Care) price change was -0.76% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Household/Personal Care industry was -2.09%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +1.52%, and the average quarterly price growth was -2.53%.
Industries' Descriptions
@Household/Personal Care (-2.09% 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.
| RBGPF | UNCHF | RBGPF / UNCHF | |
| Capitalization | 50.5B | 11.5B | 439% |
| EBITDA | 2.77B | 179B | 2% |
| Gain YTD | 22.992 | -13.467 | -171% |
| P/E Ratio | 29.41 | 20.32 | 145% |
| Revenue | 14B | 965B | 1% |
| Total Cash | 963M | 331B | 0% |
| Total Debt | 9.29B | 16.6B | 56% |
RBGPF | UNCHF | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 95 | 27 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 27 Undervalued | 49 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 100 | 100 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 96 | 65 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 54 | 84 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 18 | 85 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 49 | 85 |
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 (27) in the null industry is in the same range as UNCHF (49). 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 (65) in the null industry is in the same range as RBGPF (96). This means that UNCHF’s stock grew similarly to RBGPF’s over the last 12 months.
RBGPF's Price Growth Rating (54) in the null industry is in the same range as UNCHF (84). This means that RBGPF’s stock grew similarly to UNCHF’s over the last 12 months.
RBGPF's P/E Growth Rating (18) in the null industry is significantly better than the same rating for UNCHF (85). This means that RBGPF’s stock grew significantly faster than UNCHF’s over the last 12 months.
| RBGPF | UNCHF | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | N/A |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 63% | 1 day ago 63% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 51% | 1 day ago 69% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 52% | 1 day ago 65% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 45% | 1 day ago 67% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 46% | 1 day ago 71% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 19 days ago 59% | 4 days ago 54% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 25 days ago 50% | 2 days ago 62% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 78% | 1 day ago 57% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 67% |
Advertisement
| 1 Day | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ETFs / NAME | Price $ | Chg $ | Chg % |
| BCOR | 33.57 | 0.37 | +1.11% |
| Grayscale Bitcoin Adopters ETF | |||
| SUSA | 134.81 | 1.04 | +0.78% |
| iShares ESG Optimized MSCI USA ETF | |||
| VBND | 44.06 | -0.04 | -0.10% |
| Vident U.S. Bond Strategy ETF | |||
| SBI | 7.87 | -0.02 | -0.25% |
| Western Asset Intermediate Muni Fund | |||
| SNPG | 51.34 | -0.48 | -0.93% |
| Xtrackers S&P 500 Growth Scrd & Scrn 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.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To RBGPF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RBGPF | 100% | -5.02% | ||
| RBGLY - RBGPF | 69% Closely correlated | +0.07% | ||
| UNLRF - RBGPF | 24% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| UNCHF - RBGPF | 20% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| SPCO - RBGPF | 19% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
| UNICY - RBGPF | 10% Poorly correlated | +0.93% | ||
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.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To UNCHF | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UNCHF | 100% | N/A | ||
| UNICY - UNCHF | 41% Loosely correlated | +0.93% | ||
| UNLYF - UNCHF | 22% Poorly correlated | +0.63% | ||
| RBGPF - UNCHF | 20% Poorly correlated | -5.02% | ||
| SSDOY - UNCHF | 16% Poorly correlated | -0.69% | ||
| SPCO - UNCHF | 7% Poorly correlated | N/A | ||
More | ||||