600030.SS vs 601398.SS — which is stronger right now?
Same dated snapshot (2026-09-01): 600030.SS quality —/100 vs 601398.SS —/100; engine LONG vs LONG. The comparison below is computed, dated, and auditable — not an opinion.
| Snapshot | 2026-09-01 · source: tencent | |
|---|---|---|
| 600030.SS (CITIC Securities) | 601398.SS (ICBC) | |
| Market / sector | ashare · Brokerage | ashare · Financials |
| Price | ¥27.88 | ¥7.85 |
| Quality score | —/100 | —/100 |
| Engine signal | LONG · 89 bars · uPnL +7.7% | LONG · 110 bars · uPnL +6.6% |
| Total return | +9.0% | +11.1% |
Thesis-break template (Brokerage)
core revenue contracting two quarters; margin premium eroding; net debt deteriorating; key-executive exits
Cite this page
Balance Labs Research Desk (2026-09-01). "600030.SS vs 601398.SS — which is stronger right now?." balancelabs.app · https://balancelabs.app/stocks/compare/600030.ss-vs-601398.ss · CC BY 4.0
Ask anything
30 free credits monthly · no card required · research support, not advice
← compare hub · snapshot 2026-09-01 · not investment advice