Is Celestica The Best AI Stock to Buy Now?
Technology and hardware business Celestica (NYSE:CLS) has seen massive upward…
Buy
59
MCON.TO Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings
Last price:
$24.31
Seasonality move
:
-1.14%
Day range:
$24.55 - $24.57
52-week range:
$21.26 - $24.66
Dividend yield:
2.25%
P/E ratio:
--
P/S ratio:
--
P/B ratio:
--
Volume:
1.2K
Avg. volume:
3.4K
1-year change:
8.1%
Market cap:
--
Revenue:
--
EPS (TTM):
--
Price Performance History
Performance vs. Valuation Benchmarks
SEE THE 1% OF STOCKS YOU NEED TO OWN FOR MASSIVE RETURNS
GET BETTER TRADE IDEAS
Competitors
| Company | Revenue Forecast | Earnings Forecast | Revenue Growth Forecast | Earnings Growth Forecast | Analyst Price Target Median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
MCON.TO
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
CBIN.TO
CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
CNV.TO
Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
TCON.TO
TD Conservative ETF Portfolio
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
XINC.TO
iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
ZCON.TO
BMO Conservative ETF
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
| Company | Price | Analyst Target | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | Dividend per Share | Dividend Yield | Price / LTM Sales |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
MCON.TO
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF
|
$24.55 | -- | -- | -- | $0.16 | 2.25% | -- |
|
CBIN.TO
CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF
|
$24.73 | -- | -- | -- | $0.11 | 1.76% | -- |
|
CNV.TO
Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs
|
$22.20 | -- | -- | -- | $0.18 | 2.97% | -- |
|
TCON.TO
TD Conservative ETF Portfolio
|
$17.10 | -- | -- | -- | $0.04 | 2.75% | -- |
|
XINC.TO
iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio
|
$21.56 | -- | -- | -- | $0.22 | 3.09% | -- |
|
ZCON.TO
BMO Conservative ETF
|
$12.94 | -- | -- | -- | $0.08 | 2.29% | -- |
| Company | Total Debt / Total Capital | Beta | Debt to Equity | Quick Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
MCON.TO
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF
|
-- | 0.412 | -- | -- |
|
CBIN.TO
CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF
|
-- | 0.406 | -- | -- |
|
CNV.TO
Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs
|
-- | 0.297 | -- | -- |
|
TCON.TO
TD Conservative ETF Portfolio
|
-- | 0.425 | -- | -- |
|
XINC.TO
iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio
|
-- | 0.277 | -- | -- |
|
ZCON.TO
BMO Conservative ETF
|
-- | 0.413 | -- | -- |
| Company | Gross Profit | Operating Income | Return on Invested Capital | Return on Common Equity | EBIT Margin | Free Cash Flow |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
MCON.TO
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
CBIN.TO
CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
CNV.TO
Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
TCON.TO
TD Conservative ETF Portfolio
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
XINC.TO
iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
|
ZCON.TO
BMO Conservative ETF
|
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF vs. Competitors
-
Which has Higher Returns MCON.TO or CBIN.TO?
CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF has a net margin of -- compared to Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net margin of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's return on equity of -- beat CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF's return on equity of --.
Company Gross Margin Earnings Per Share Invested Capital MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- CBIN.TOCI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF-- -- -- -
What do Analysts Say About MCON.TO or CBIN.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has higher upside potential than CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF, analysts believe Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is more attractive than CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF.
Company Buy Ratings Hold Ratings Sell Ratings MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF0 0 0 CBIN.TOCI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF0 0 0 -
Is MCON.TO or CBIN.TO More Risky?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a beta of 0.484, which suggesting that the stock is 51.576% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.
-
Which is a Better Dividend Stock MCON.TO or CBIN.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.25%. CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF offers a yield of 1.76% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.11 per share. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.
-
Which has Better Financial Ratios MCON.TO or CBIN.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF quarterly revenues of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net income of -- is lower than CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF's net income of --. Notably, Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is -- versus -- for CI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.
Company Price/Sales Ratio Price/Earnings Ratio Quarterly Revenue Quarterly Net Income MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- -- CBIN.TOCI Balanced Income Asset Allocation ETF-- -- -- --
-
Which has Higher Returns MCON.TO or CNV.TO?
Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs has a net margin of -- compared to Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net margin of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's return on equity of -- beat Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs's return on equity of --.
Company Gross Margin Earnings Per Share Invested Capital MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- CNV.TOFranklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs-- -- -- -
What do Analysts Say About MCON.TO or CNV.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has higher upside potential than Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs, analysts believe Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is more attractive than Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs.
Company Buy Ratings Hold Ratings Sell Ratings MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF0 0 0 CNV.TOFranklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs0 0 0 -
Is MCON.TO or CNV.TO More Risky?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a beta of 0.484, which suggesting that the stock is 51.576% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.
-
Which is a Better Dividend Stock MCON.TO or CNV.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.25%. Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs offers a yield of 2.97% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.18 per share. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.
-
Which has Better Financial Ratios MCON.TO or CNV.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs quarterly revenues of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net income of -- is lower than Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs's net income of --. Notably, Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is -- versus -- for Franklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.
Company Price/Sales Ratio Price/Earnings Ratio Quarterly Revenue Quarterly Net Income MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- -- CNV.TOFranklin Conservative Income ETF Portfolio ETF Srs-- -- -- --
-
Which has Higher Returns MCON.TO or TCON.TO?
TD Conservative ETF Portfolio has a net margin of -- compared to Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net margin of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's return on equity of -- beat TD Conservative ETF Portfolio's return on equity of --.
Company Gross Margin Earnings Per Share Invested Capital MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- TCON.TOTD Conservative ETF Portfolio-- -- -- -
What do Analysts Say About MCON.TO or TCON.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand TD Conservative ETF Portfolio has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has higher upside potential than TD Conservative ETF Portfolio, analysts believe Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is more attractive than TD Conservative ETF Portfolio.
Company Buy Ratings Hold Ratings Sell Ratings MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF0 0 0 TCON.TOTD Conservative ETF Portfolio0 0 0 -
Is MCON.TO or TCON.TO More Risky?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a beta of 0.484, which suggesting that the stock is 51.576% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison TD Conservative ETF Portfolio has a beta of 0.467, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 53.34%.
-
Which is a Better Dividend Stock MCON.TO or TCON.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.25%. TD Conservative ETF Portfolio offers a yield of 2.75% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.04 per share. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. TD Conservative ETF Portfolio pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.
-
Which has Better Financial Ratios MCON.TO or TCON.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than TD Conservative ETF Portfolio quarterly revenues of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net income of -- is lower than TD Conservative ETF Portfolio's net income of --. Notably, Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while TD Conservative ETF Portfolio's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is -- versus -- for TD Conservative ETF Portfolio. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.
Company Price/Sales Ratio Price/Earnings Ratio Quarterly Revenue Quarterly Net Income MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- -- TCON.TOTD Conservative ETF Portfolio-- -- -- --
-
Which has Higher Returns MCON.TO or XINC.TO?
iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio has a net margin of -- compared to Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net margin of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's return on equity of -- beat iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio's return on equity of --.
Company Gross Margin Earnings Per Share Invested Capital MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- XINC.TOiShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio-- -- -- -
What do Analysts Say About MCON.TO or XINC.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has higher upside potential than iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio, analysts believe Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is more attractive than iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio.
Company Buy Ratings Hold Ratings Sell Ratings MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF0 0 0 XINC.TOiShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio0 0 0 -
Is MCON.TO or XINC.TO More Risky?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a beta of 0.484, which suggesting that the stock is 51.576% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio has a beta of 0.385, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 61.515%.
-
Which is a Better Dividend Stock MCON.TO or XINC.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.25%. iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio offers a yield of 3.09% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.22 per share. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.
-
Which has Better Financial Ratios MCON.TO or XINC.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio quarterly revenues of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net income of -- is lower than iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio's net income of --. Notably, Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is -- versus -- for iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.
Company Price/Sales Ratio Price/Earnings Ratio Quarterly Revenue Quarterly Net Income MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- -- XINC.TOiShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio-- -- -- --
-
Which has Higher Returns MCON.TO or ZCON.TO?
BMO Conservative ETF has a net margin of -- compared to Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net margin of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's return on equity of -- beat BMO Conservative ETF's return on equity of --.
Company Gross Margin Earnings Per Share Invested Capital MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- ZCON.TOBMO Conservative ETF-- -- -- -
What do Analysts Say About MCON.TO or ZCON.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand BMO Conservative ETF has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has higher upside potential than BMO Conservative ETF, analysts believe Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is more attractive than BMO Conservative ETF.
Company Buy Ratings Hold Ratings Sell Ratings MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF0 0 0 ZCON.TOBMO Conservative ETF0 0 0 -
Is MCON.TO or ZCON.TO More Risky?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a beta of 0.484, which suggesting that the stock is 51.576% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison BMO Conservative ETF has a beta of 0.496, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 50.411%.
-
Which is a Better Dividend Stock MCON.TO or ZCON.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF has a quarterly dividend of $0.16 per share corresponding to a yield of 2.25%. BMO Conservative ETF offers a yield of 2.29% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.08 per share. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. BMO Conservative ETF pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.
-
Which has Better Financial Ratios MCON.TO or ZCON.TO?
Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than BMO Conservative ETF quarterly revenues of --. Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's net income of -- is lower than BMO Conservative ETF's net income of --. Notably, Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while BMO Conservative ETF's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Mackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF is -- versus -- for BMO Conservative ETF. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.
Company Price/Sales Ratio Price/Earnings Ratio Quarterly Revenue Quarterly Net Income MCON.TOMackenzie Conservative Allocation ETF-- -- -- -- ZCON.TOBMO Conservative ETF-- -- -- --
SEE THE 1% OF STOCKS YOU NEED TO OWN FOR MASSIVE RETURNS
GET BETTER TRADE IDEAS
Popular
Will AI Disrupt SaaS Software Stocks?
Since January 28th, software stocks in the United States have…
Why Is Meta Stock Going Higher?
Over the last five days, shares of Instagram and Facebook…
Stock Ideas
Sell
49
Is NVDA Stock a Buy?
Market Cap: $4.4T
P/E Ratio: 37x
Sell
46
Is AAPL Stock a Buy?
Market Cap: $3.9T
P/E Ratio: 35x
Sell
37
Is GOOGL Stock a Buy?
Market Cap: $3.7T
P/E Ratio: 28x
Alerts
Sell
50
AXTI alert for Mar 3
AXT, Inc. [AXTI] is down 9.65% over the past day.
Buy
53
AAOI alert for Mar 3
Applied Optoelectronics, Inc. [AAOI] is down 6.93% over the past day.
Sell
32
TPB alert for Mar 3
Turning Point Brands, Inc. [TPB] is down 0.87% over the past day.
