Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See 1959.HK's competitors and their performance on the HKSE and across the wider stock market.
Peer Comparison Table: Auto - Dealerships Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more for 1959.HK and its HKSE peers.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1959.HK | HK$4.68 | +5.88% | 2.5B | -24.74 | -HK$0.19 | N/A |
| 0881.HK | HK$4.58 | -1.82% | 10.9B | -5.74 | -HK$0.80 | N/A |
| 0693.HK | HK$1.55 | -3.13% | 3.1B | 6.28 | HK$0.25 | +5.16% |
| 1872.HK | HK$4.10 | -1.68% | 2.7B | -51.68 | -HK$0.08 | N/A |
| 3669.HK | HK$0.89 | +1.14% | 1.6B | -0.29 | -HK$3.00 | +17.28% |
| 2418.HK | HK$2.70 | +0.56% | 1.5B | 90.00 | HK$0.03 | +1.34% |
| 1728.HK | HK$0.14 | -2.05% | 1.4B | -0.26 | -HK$0.54 | N/A |
| 2443.HK | HK$1.50 | +1.35% | 1.2B | 146.00 | HK$0.01 | N/A |
| 3836.HK | HK$0.66 | +1.55% | 978.1M | -1.41 | -HK$0.46 | N/A |
| 1268.HK | HK$0.38 | -5.06% | 511.6M | -0.68 | -HK$0.56 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
Zhongsheng Group Holdings Limited (HKSE: 0881.HK)
1959.HK vs 0881.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 0881.HK has a market cap of 10.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 0881.HK trades at HK$4.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 0881.HK's P/E ratio is -5.74. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 0881.HK's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 0881.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 0881.HK's competition here
Tan Chong International Limited (HKSE: 0693.HK)
1959.HK vs 0693.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 0693.HK has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 0693.HK trades at HK$1.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 0693.HK's P/E ratio is 6.28. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 0693.HK's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is similarly volatile compared to 0693.HK. This indicates similar risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 0693.HK's competition here
Guan Chao Holdings Limited (HKSE: 1872.HK)
1959.HK vs 1872.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 1872.HK has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 1872.HK trades at HK$4.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 1872.HK's P/E ratio is -51.68. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 1872.HK's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 1872.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 1872.HK's competition here
China Yongda Automobiles Services Holdings Limited (HKSE: 3669.HK)
1959.HK vs 3669.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 3669.HK has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 3669.HK trades at HK$0.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 3669.HK's P/E ratio is -0.29. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 3669.HK's ROE of -0.54%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 3669.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 3669.HK's competition here
Deewin Tianxia Co., Ltd (HKSE: 2418.HK)
1959.HK vs 2418.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 2418.HK has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 2418.HK trades at HK$2.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 2418.HK's P/E ratio is 90.00. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 2418.HK's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 2418.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 2418.HK's competition here
China ZhengTong Auto Services Holdings Limited (HKSE: 1728.HK)
1959.HK vs 1728.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 1728.HK has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 1728.HK trades at HK$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 1728.HK's P/E ratio is -0.26. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 1728.HK's ROE of +1.30%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 1728.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 1728.HK's competition here
Autostreets Development Limited (HKSE: 2443.HK)
1959.HK vs 2443.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 2443.HK has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 2443.HK trades at HK$1.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 2443.HK's P/E ratio is 146.00. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 2443.HK's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is similarly volatile compared to 2443.HK. This indicates similar risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 2443.HK's competition here
China Harmony Auto Holding Limited (HKSE: 3836.HK)
1959.HK vs 3836.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 3836.HK has a market cap of 978.1M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 3836.HK trades at HK$0.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 3836.HK's P/E ratio is -1.41. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 3836.HK's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 3836.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 3836.HK's competition here
China MeiDong Auto Holdings Limited (HKSE: 1268.HK)
1959.HK vs 1268.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 1268.HK has a market cap of 511.6M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 1268.HK trades at HK$0.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 1268.HK's P/E ratio is -0.68. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 1268.HK's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is similarly volatile compared to 1268.HK. This indicates similar risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 1268.HK's competition here
China Environmental Resources Group Limited (HKSE: 1130.HK)
1959.HK vs 1130.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 1130.HK has a market cap of 334.9M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 1130.HK trades at HK$0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 1130.HK's P/E ratio is -17.77. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 1130.HK's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 1130.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 1130.HK's competition here
Grand Baoxin Auto Group Limited (HKSE: 1293.HK)
1959.HK vs 1293.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 1293.HK has a market cap of 244M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 1293.HK trades at HK$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 1293.HK's P/E ratio is -0.85. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 1293.HK's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 1293.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 1293.HK's competition here
New Sparkle Roll International Group Limited (HKSE: 0970.HK)
1959.HK vs 0970.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 0970.HK has a market cap of 199.2M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 0970.HK trades at HK$0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 0970.HK's P/E ratio is -0.10. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 0970.HK's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 0970.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 0970.HK's competition here
BetterLife Holding Limited (HKSE: 6909.HK)
1959.HK vs 6909.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 6909.HK has a market cap of 145M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 6909.HK trades at HK$0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 6909.HK's P/E ratio is 2.44. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 6909.HK's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 6909.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 6909.HK's competition here
Sunfonda Group Holdings Limited (HKSE: 1771.HK)
1959.HK vs 1771.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 1771.HK has a market cap of 97.8M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 1771.HK trades at HK$0.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 1771.HK's P/E ratio is -0.43. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 1771.HK's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 1771.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 1771.HK's competition here
Sinofortune Financial Holdings Limited (HKSE: 8123.HK)
1959.HK vs 8123.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 8123.HK has a market cap of 36.2M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 8123.HK trades at HK$0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 8123.HK's P/E ratio is -3.61. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 8123.HK's ROE of +20.10%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is similarly volatile compared to 8123.HK. This indicates similar risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 8123.HK's competition here
Sinofortune-old (HKSE: 8552.HK)
1959.HK vs 8552.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 8552.HK has a market cap of 28.4M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 8552.HK trades at HK$0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 8552.HK's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 8552.HK's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is similarly volatile compared to 8552.HK. This indicates similar risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 8552.HK's competition here
G.A. Holdings Limited (HKSE: 8126.HK)
1959.HK vs 8126.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 8126.HK has a market cap of 18.1M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 8126.HK trades at HK$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 8126.HK's P/E ratio is -1.90. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 8126.HK's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 8126.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 8126.HK's competition here
Zhongshi Minan Holdings Limited (HKSE: 8283.HK)
1959.HK vs 8283.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 8283.HK has a market cap of 13.5M. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 8283.HK trades at HK$0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 8283.HK's P/E ratio is 0.71. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 8283.HK's ROE of -0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 8283.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 8283.HK's competition here
China Rundong Auto Group Limited (HKSE: 1365.HK)
1959.HK vs 1365.HK Comparison August 2026
Zhong Ju Investment Group Limited (HKSE: 1959.HK) plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance on the HKSE reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 1959.HK stands at 2.5B. In comparison, 1365.HK has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, 1959.HK is priced at HK$4.68 on the HKSE, while 1365.HK trades at HK$0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
1959.HK currently has a P/E ratio of -24.74, whereas 1365.HK's P/E ratio is 0.71. In terms of profitability, 1959.HK's ROE is -0.32%, compared to 1365.HK's ROE of +7.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 1959.HK is less volatile compared to 1365.HK. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 1959.HK.Check 1365.HK's competition here