RHCO
Price
$0.03
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Jan 14 closing price
Capitalization
N/A
SFFFF
Price
$77.01
Change
-$6.49 (-7.77%)
Updated
Jan 2 closing price
Capitalization
2.94B
Ad is loading...

RHCO vs SFFFF

Header iconRHCO vs SFFFF Comparison
Open Charts RHCO vs SFFFFBanner chart's image
Readen Holding
Price$0.03
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$3.5K
CapitalizationN/A
PEUGEOT INVEST
Price$77.01
Change-$6.49 (-7.77%)
Volume$200
Capitalization2.94B
RHCO vs SFFFF Comparison Chart
Loading...
RHCO
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SFFFF
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
RHCO vs. SFFFF commentary
Jan 20, 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 RHCO is a Hold and SFFFF is a Hold.

Ad is loading...
COMPARISON
Comparison
Jan 20, 2025
Stock price -- (RHCO: $0.03 vs. SFFFF: $77.01)
Brand notoriety: RHCO and SFFFF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Investment Managers industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: RHCO: 7% vs. SFFFF: 47%
Market capitalization -- RHCO: $0 vs. SFFFF: $2.94B
RHCO [@Investment Managers] is valued at $0. SFFFF’s [@Investment Managers] market capitalization is $2.94B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Investment Managers] industry ranges from $124.17B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Investment Managers] industry is $5.97B.

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).

RHCO’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green whileSFFFF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

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

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.

RHCO’s TA Score shows that 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish while SFFFF’s TA Score has 0 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • RHCO’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 3 bearish.
  • SFFFF’s TA Score: 0 bullish, 2 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, RHCO is a better buy in the short-term than SFFFF.

Price Growth

RHCO (@Investment Managers) experienced а -15.23% price change this week, while SFFFF (@Investment Managers) price change was 0.00% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Investment Managers industry was +2.49%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +2.40%, and the average quarterly price growth was +7.41%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Investment Managers (+2.49% weekly)

Investment Managers manage financial assets and other investments of clients. Management includes designing a short- or long-term strategy for buying/holding and selling of portfolio holdings. It can also include tax services and other aspects of financial planning as well. While it is perceived that the industry is faced with growing competition from robo-advisors/digital platforms and passive/ index-tracking funds, many investors still find value in actively managed in-person services that investment management companies often emphasize on. At the same time, many wealth managers are also incorporating digital initiatives/low cost options in addition to their in-person customized services. Their main sources of revenues are fees as a percentage of assets under management, in addition to a certain portion of clients’ gains from asset appreciation. BlackRock, Inc., Blackstone Group Inc and Brookfield Asset Management are some of the major investment management companies.

SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RHCO YTD gains are higher at: 69.531 vs. SFFFF (-7.772).
RHCOSFFFFRHCO / SFFFF
CapitalizationN/A2.94B-
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD69.531-7.772-895%
P/E RatioN/A8.04-
RevenueN/A431M-
Total CashN/A8.15M-
Total DebtN/A1.06B-
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
RHCO vs SFFFF: Fundamental Ratings
RHCO
SFFFF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
5050
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
71
Overvalued
84
Overvalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
91100
SMR RATING
1..100
10089
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
3982
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
9264
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
8524

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.

RHCO's Valuation (71) in the null industry is in the same range as SFFFF (84). This means that RHCO’s stock grew similarly to SFFFF’s over the last 12 months.

RHCO's Profit vs Risk Rating (91) in the null industry is in the same range as SFFFF (100). This means that RHCO’s stock grew similarly to SFFFF’s over the last 12 months.

SFFFF's SMR Rating (89) in the null industry is in the same range as RHCO (100). This means that SFFFF’s stock grew similarly to RHCO’s over the last 12 months.

RHCO's Price Growth Rating (39) in the null industry is somewhat better than the same rating for SFFFF (82). This means that RHCO’s stock grew somewhat faster than SFFFF’s over the last 12 months.

SFFFF's P/E Growth Rating (64) in the null industry is in the same range as RHCO (92). This means that SFFFF’s stock grew similarly to RHCO’s over the last 12 months.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RHCOSFFFF
RSI
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
90%
N/A
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
81%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
22%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
79%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
33%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
77%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
13%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
79%
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
23%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 13 days ago
78%
N/A
Declines
ODDS (%)
N/A
N/A
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 12 days ago
90%
N/A
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 12 days ago
79%
N/A
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
RHCO
Daily Signalchanged days ago
Gain/Loss if bought
Show more...
SFFFF
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 %
SBSDX46.810.46
+0.99%
Franklin S&P 500 Index D
SCNUX11.310.08
+0.71%
Invesco Income Advantage U.S. Fund Inv
CFJAX32.950.23
+0.70%
Calvert US Large Cap Value Rspnb Idx A
JDNAX70.400.49
+0.70%
Janus Henderson Growth And Income A
CUHCX10.420.04
+0.39%
Victory US 500 Enh Vol Wtd Idx C

RHCO and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that RHCO and QUILF have been poorly correlated (+11% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that RHCO and QUILF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To RHCO
1D Price
Change %
RHCO100%
N/A
QUILF - RHCO
11%
Poorly correlated
+1.62%
SLFPY - RHCO
4%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SLFPF - RHCO
1%
Poorly correlated
+2.41%
RAFI - RHCO
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SFFFF - RHCO
-3%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

SFFFF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that SFFFF and MGHCF have been poorly correlated (+20% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that SFFFF and MGHCF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SFFFF
1D Price
Change %
SFFFF100%
N/A
MGHCF - SFFFF
20%
Poorly correlated
N/A
QUILF - SFFFF
0%
Poorly correlated
+1.62%
RMGOF - SFFFF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
RESCU - SFFFF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
SLFPY - SFFFF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More