SHFS
Price
$0.44
Change
-$0.01 (-2.22%)
Updated
May 13, 04:59 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
2.26M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
WAL
Price
$74.97
Change
-$2.59 (-3.34%)
Updated
May 13, 04:59 PM (EDT)
Capitalization
8.19B
63 days until earnings call
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

SHFS vs WAL

Header iconSHFS vs WAL Comparison
Open Charts SHFS vs WALBanner chart's image
SHFS vs WAL Comparison Chart in %
loading
loading
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
SHFS vs. WAL commentary
May 14, 2026

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 SHFS is a Hold and WAL is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
COMPARISON
Comparison
May 14, 2026
Stock price -- (SHFS: $0.45 vs. WAL: $74.97)
Brand notoriety: SHFS and WAL are both not notable
Both companies represent the Regional Banks industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: SHFS: 21% vs. WAL: 101%
Market capitalization -- SHFS: $2.26M vs. WAL: $8.19B
SHFS [@Regional Banks] is valued at $2.26M. WAL’s [@Regional Banks] market capitalization is $8.19B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Regional Banks] industry ranges from $142.82B to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Regional Banks] industry is $9.12B.

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).

SHFS’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileWAL’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).

  • SHFS’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • WAL’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
According to our system of comparison, WAL is a better buy in the long-term than SHFS.

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.

SHFS’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while WAL’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).

  • SHFS’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 6 bearish.
  • WAL’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
According to our system of comparison, WAL is a better buy in the short-term than SHFS.

Price Growth

SHFS (@Regional Banks) experienced а -45.10% price change this week, while WAL (@Regional Banks) price change was -10.03% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Regional Banks industry was -1.25%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was +0.84%, and the average quarterly price growth was +16.77%.

Reported Earning Dates

WAL is expected to report earnings on Jul 16, 2026.

Industries' Descriptions

@Regional Banks (-1.25% 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
WAL($8.19B) has a higher market cap than SHFS($2.26M). WAL has higher P/E ratio than SHFS: WAL (8.73) vs SHFS (0.98). WAL YTD gains are higher at: -10.412 vs. SHFS (-58.519). SHFS has less debt than WAL: SHFS (753K) vs WAL (6.48B). WAL has higher revenues than SHFS: WAL (3.47B) vs SHFS (9.51M).
SHFSWALSHFS / WAL
Capitalization2.26M8.19B0%
EBITDAN/AN/A-
Gain YTD-58.519-10.412562%
P/E Ratio0.988.7311%
Revenue9.51M3.47B0%
Total CashN/A463M-
Total Debt753K6.48B0%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
WAL: Fundamental Ratings
WAL
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
82
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
28
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
9
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
60
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
69
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
50

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.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
SHFSWAL
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
75%
N/A
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
69%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
72%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
76%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
61%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
63%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
85%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
72%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
89%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
68%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 9 days ago
74%
Bullish Trend 8 days ago
71%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
74%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
82%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
73%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
62%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
SHFS
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
WAL
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
STOCK / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
JEM1.230.07
+5.60%
707 Cayman Holdings Limited
AISP2.460.11
+4.89%
Airship AI Holdings
LU1.960.02
+1.03%
Lufax Holding Ltd
UNM80.43-0.73
-0.90%
Unum Group
CCAP13.07-0.15
-1.13%
Crescent Capital BDC

SHFS and

Correlation & Price change

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

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To SHFS
1D Price
Change %
SHFS100%
-2.05%
FBP - SHFS
25%
Poorly correlated
-1.16%
WAL - SHFS
24%
Poorly correlated
-3.34%
OFG - SHFS
24%
Poorly correlated
-0.25%
TCBI - SHFS
24%
Poorly correlated
-1.50%
SQCF - SHFS
24%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

WAL and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, WAL has been closely correlated with FNB. These tickers have moved in lockstep 85% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if WAL jumps, then FNB could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To WAL
1D Price
Change %
WAL100%
-3.34%
FNB - WAL
85%
Closely correlated
-1.88%
ASB - WAL
84%
Closely correlated
-1.72%
ZION - WAL
84%
Closely correlated
-1.94%
TFC - WAL
83%
Closely correlated
-2.62%
EWBC - WAL
83%
Closely correlated
-1.55%
More