Tobishima Holdings Inc.
Tobishima Holdings Inc. (256A.T) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (256A.T) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Engineering & Construction Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 256A.T | ¥2,128.00 | -0.88% | 40.8B | 10.94 | ¥194.48 | +4.65% |
| 1812.T | ¥6,065.00 | +0.43% | 2.8T | 16.96 | ¥357.51 | +1.92% |
| 1801.T | ¥16,030.00 | +0.41% | 2.6T | 19.61 | ¥817.41 | +1.40% |
| 1802.T | ¥3,783.00 | +0.16% | 2.6T | 15.86 | ¥238.49 | +2.30% |
| 1803.T | ¥2,877.00 | +1.28% | 1.9T | 19.49 | ¥147.61 | +1.96% |
| 1944.T | ¥7,191.00 | +0.66% | 1.4T | 23.87 | ¥301.25 | +1.72% |
| 1942.T | ¥6,113.00 | +1.51% | 1.2T | 24.23 | ¥252.34 | +1.71% |
| 1959.T | ¥9,535.00 | +0.00% | 674.5B | 21.99 | ¥433.70 | +2.09% |
| 1963.T | ¥2,469.50 | -0.14% | 597.3B | -399.60 | -¥6.18 | +1.29% |
| 1721.T | ¥5,138.00 | +1.56% | 595.4B | 19.06 | ¥269.64 | +2.34% |
Stock Comparison
256A.T vs 1812.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1812.T has a market cap of 2.8T. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1812.T trades at ¥6,065.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1812.T's P/E ratio is 16.96. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1812.T's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T and 1812.T have similar daily volatility (1.54).Check 1812.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1801.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1801.T has a market cap of 2.6T. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1801.T trades at ¥16,030.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1801.T's P/E ratio is 19.61. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1801.T's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1801.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1801.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1802.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1802.T has a market cap of 2.6T. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1802.T trades at ¥3,783.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1802.T's P/E ratio is 15.86. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1802.T's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1802.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1802.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1803.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1803.T has a market cap of 1.9T. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1803.T trades at ¥2,877.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1803.T's P/E ratio is 19.49. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1803.T's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1803.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1803.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1944.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1944.T has a market cap of 1.4T. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1944.T trades at ¥7,191.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1944.T's P/E ratio is 23.87. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1944.T's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1944.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1944.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1942.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1942.T has a market cap of 1.2T. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1942.T trades at ¥6,113.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1942.T's P/E ratio is 24.23. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1942.T's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1942.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1942.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1959.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1959.T has a market cap of 674.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1959.T trades at ¥9,535.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1959.T's P/E ratio is 21.99. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1959.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1959.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1959.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1963.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1963.T has a market cap of 597.3B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1963.T trades at ¥2,469.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1963.T's P/E ratio is -399.60. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1963.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1963.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1963.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1721.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1721.T has a market cap of 595.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1721.T trades at ¥5,138.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1721.T's P/E ratio is 19.06. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1721.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1721.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1721.T's competition here
256A.T vs 5076.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 5076.T has a market cap of 569.6B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 5076.T trades at ¥2,255.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 5076.T's P/E ratio is 13.70. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 5076.T's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 5076.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 5076.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1951.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1951.T has a market cap of 561.3B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1951.T trades at ¥2,782.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1951.T's P/E ratio is 18.74. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1951.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1951.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1951.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1893.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1893.T has a market cap of 488.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1893.T trades at ¥1,787.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1893.T's P/E ratio is 25.27. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1893.T's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1893.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1893.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1860.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1860.T has a market cap of 444B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1860.T trades at ¥1,479.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1860.T's P/E ratio is 14.45. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1860.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1860.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1860.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1961.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1961.T has a market cap of 369.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1961.T trades at ¥7,260.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1961.T's P/E ratio is 20.74. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1961.T's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1961.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1961.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1980.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1980.T has a market cap of 352B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1980.T trades at ¥2,721.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1980.T's P/E ratio is 14.30. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1980.T's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1980.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1980.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1949.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1949.T has a market cap of 341.3B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1949.T trades at ¥9,700.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1949.T's P/E ratio is 0.00. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1949.T's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1949.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1949.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1417.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1417.T has a market cap of 323.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1417.T trades at ¥3,649.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1417.T's P/E ratio is 16.18. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1417.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1417.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1417.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1719.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1719.T has a market cap of 316B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1719.T trades at ¥2,016.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1719.T's P/E ratio is 11.95. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1719.T's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1719.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1719.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1414.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1414.T has a market cap of 293.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1414.T trades at ¥1,444.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1414.T's P/E ratio is 20.05. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1414.T's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1414.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1414.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1861.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1861.T has a market cap of 274.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1861.T trades at ¥1,597.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1861.T's P/E ratio is 19.90. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1861.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1861.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1861.T's competition here
256A.T vs 6366.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 6366.T has a market cap of 253.2B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 6366.T trades at ¥977.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 6366.T's P/E ratio is 33.25. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 6366.T's ROE of +1.64%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 6366.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 6366.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1941.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1941.T has a market cap of 252.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1941.T trades at ¥4,670.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1941.T's P/E ratio is 11.95. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1941.T's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1941.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1941.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1885.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1885.T has a market cap of 249.3B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1885.T trades at ¥3,225.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1885.T's P/E ratio is 16.02. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1885.T's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1885.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1885.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1833.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1833.T has a market cap of 231B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1833.T trades at ¥6,440.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1833.T's P/E ratio is 17.88. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1833.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T and 1833.T have similar daily volatility (1.54).Check 1833.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1820.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1820.T has a market cap of 230.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1820.T trades at ¥5,845.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1820.T's P/E ratio is 12.82. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1820.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1820.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1820.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1835.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1835.T has a market cap of 192.2B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1835.T trades at ¥5,580.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1835.T's P/E ratio is 14.99. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1835.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1835.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1835.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1946.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1946.T has a market cap of 189.6B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1946.T trades at ¥2,042.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1946.T's P/E ratio is 12.55. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1946.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1946.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1946.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1934.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1934.T has a market cap of 181B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1934.T trades at ¥2,635.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1934.T's P/E ratio is 14.95. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1934.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1934.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1934.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1926.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1926.T has a market cap of 168.3B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1926.T trades at ¥3,935.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1926.T's P/E ratio is 15.80. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1926.T's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1926.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1926.T's competition here
256A.T vs 6055.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 6055.T has a market cap of 167.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 6055.T trades at ¥1,626.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 6055.T's P/E ratio is 18.07. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 6055.T's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 6055.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 6055.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1890.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1890.T has a market cap of 163.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1890.T trades at ¥1,742.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1890.T's P/E ratio is 18.28. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1890.T's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1890.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1890.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1952.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1952.T has a market cap of 154.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1952.T trades at ¥3,405.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1952.T's P/E ratio is 13.21. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1952.T's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1952.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1952.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1720.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1720.T has a market cap of 153.6B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1720.T trades at ¥1,450.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1720.T's P/E ratio is 23.14. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1720.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1720.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1720.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9716.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9716.T has a market cap of 148.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9716.T trades at ¥1,334.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9716.T's P/E ratio is 14.39. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9716.T's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 9716.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9716.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1965.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1965.T has a market cap of 139.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1965.T trades at ¥6,820.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1965.T's P/E ratio is 14.11. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1965.T's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1965.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1965.T's competition here
256A.T vs 6330.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 6330.T has a market cap of 135.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 6330.T trades at ¥2,319.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 6330.T's P/E ratio is -49.31. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 6330.T's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 6330.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 6330.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1762.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1762.T has a market cap of 132B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1762.T trades at ¥3,790.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1762.T's P/E ratio is 12.68. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1762.T's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1762.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1762.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1871.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1871.T has a market cap of 130.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1871.T trades at ¥2,786.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1871.T's P/E ratio is 14.72. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1871.T's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1871.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1871.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1982.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1982.T has a market cap of 122.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1982.T trades at ¥2,852.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1982.T's P/E ratio is 20.40. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1982.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1982.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1982.T's competition here
256A.T vs 5911.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 5911.T has a market cap of 119.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 5911.T trades at ¥3,020.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 5911.T's P/E ratio is 9.90. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 5911.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 5911.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 5911.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1879.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1879.T has a market cap of 114.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1879.T trades at ¥1,963.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1879.T's P/E ratio is 8.41. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1879.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1879.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1879.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1884.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1884.T has a market cap of 110.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1884.T trades at ¥2,512.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1884.T's P/E ratio is 17.49. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1884.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1884.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1884.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9161.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9161.T has a market cap of 97.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9161.T trades at ¥6,480.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9161.T's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9161.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 9161.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9161.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1870.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1870.T has a market cap of 92.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1870.T trades at ¥2,147.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1870.T's P/E ratio is 8.87. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1870.T's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1870.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1870.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1939.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1939.T has a market cap of 91B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1939.T trades at ¥1,923.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1939.T's P/E ratio is 17.88. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1939.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1939.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1939.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9663.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9663.T has a market cap of 88.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9663.T trades at ¥5,660.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9663.T's P/E ratio is 22.33. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9663.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 9663.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9663.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9621.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9621.T has a market cap of 84.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9621.T trades at ¥3,065.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9621.T's P/E ratio is 14.28. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9621.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 9621.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9621.T's competition here
256A.T vs 3443.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 3443.T has a market cap of 82.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 3443.T trades at ¥1,585.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 3443.T's P/E ratio is 8.93. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 3443.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 3443.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 3443.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1976.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1976.T has a market cap of 81.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1976.T trades at ¥1,779.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1976.T's P/E ratio is 11.53. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1976.T's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1976.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1976.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1852.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1852.T has a market cap of 80.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1852.T trades at ¥997.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1852.T's P/E ratio is 13.60. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1852.T's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1852.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1852.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1882.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1882.T has a market cap of 80.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1882.T trades at ¥1,733.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1882.T's P/E ratio is 20.08. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1882.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1882.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1882.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1921.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1921.T has a market cap of 73.3B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1921.T trades at ¥2,185.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1921.T's P/E ratio is 33.89. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1921.T's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1921.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1921.T's competition here
256A.T vs 6226.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 6226.T has a market cap of 71.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 6226.T trades at ¥2,033.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 6226.T's P/E ratio is 21.22. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 6226.T's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 6226.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 6226.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1899.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1899.T has a market cap of 71.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1899.T trades at ¥8,630.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1899.T's P/E ratio is 12.87. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1899.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1899.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1899.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1799.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1799.T has a market cap of 68.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1799.T trades at ¥3,885.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1799.T's P/E ratio is 12.39. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1799.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1799.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1799.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1822.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1822.T has a market cap of 68.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1822.T trades at ¥778.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1822.T's P/E ratio is 21.15. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1822.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1822.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1822.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9755.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9755.T has a market cap of 66.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9755.T trades at ¥2,935.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9755.T's P/E ratio is 15.52. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9755.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 9755.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9755.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1815.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1815.T has a market cap of 66.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1815.T trades at ¥4,790.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1815.T's P/E ratio is 15.96. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1815.T's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1815.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1815.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1775.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1775.T has a market cap of 64.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1775.T trades at ¥7,160.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1775.T's P/E ratio is 10.44. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1775.T's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1775.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1775.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1811.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1811.T has a market cap of 61.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1811.T trades at ¥8,530.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1811.T's P/E ratio is 14.91. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1811.T's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1811.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1811.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1945.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1945.T has a market cap of 59.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1945.T trades at ¥1,783.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1945.T's P/E ratio is 15.84. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1945.T's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1945.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1945.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1954.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1954.T has a market cap of 56.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1954.T trades at ¥3,740.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1954.T's P/E ratio is 13.35. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1954.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1954.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1954.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1898.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1898.T has a market cap of 56.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1898.T trades at ¥1,532.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1898.T's P/E ratio is 12.58. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1898.T's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1898.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1898.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1948.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1948.T has a market cap of 55.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1948.T trades at ¥6,340.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1948.T's P/E ratio is 19.20. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1948.T's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1948.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1948.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1888.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1888.T has a market cap of 52.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1888.T trades at ¥4,150.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1888.T's P/E ratio is 12.02. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1888.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1888.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1888.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1929.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1929.T has a market cap of 51.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1929.T trades at ¥1,243.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1929.T's P/E ratio is 15.46. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1929.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1929.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1929.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1967.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1967.T has a market cap of 49.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1967.T trades at ¥2,209.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1967.T's P/E ratio is 11.33. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1967.T's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1967.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1967.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1786.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1786.T has a market cap of 48.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1786.T trades at ¥376.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1786.T's P/E ratio is 13.57. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1786.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1786.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1786.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1887.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1887.T has a market cap of 47.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1887.T trades at ¥601.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1887.T's P/E ratio is 22.28. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1887.T's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1887.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1887.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1827.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1827.T has a market cap of 47B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1827.T trades at ¥1,369.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1827.T's P/E ratio is 14.90. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1827.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1827.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1827.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1813.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1813.T has a market cap of 46.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1813.T trades at ¥3,070.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1813.T's P/E ratio is 15.39. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1813.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1813.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1813.T's competition here
256A.T vs 3431.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 3431.T has a market cap of 46B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 3431.T trades at ¥1,736.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 3431.T's P/E ratio is 10.44. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 3431.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 3431.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 3431.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1810.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1810.T has a market cap of 45.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1810.T trades at ¥1,609.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1810.T's P/E ratio is 11.16. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1810.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1810.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1810.T's competition here
256A.T vs 5959.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 5959.T has a market cap of 44.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 5959.T trades at ¥967.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 5959.T's P/E ratio is 13.46. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 5959.T's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 5959.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 5959.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1793.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1793.T has a market cap of 42.3B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1793.T trades at ¥1,666.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1793.T's P/E ratio is 33.59. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1793.T's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1793.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1793.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1930.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1930.T has a market cap of 40B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1930.T trades at ¥1,455.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1930.T's P/E ratio is 12.91. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1930.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1930.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1930.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9622.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9622.T has a market cap of 38.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9622.T trades at ¥1,567.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9622.T's P/E ratio is 10.19. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9622.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 9622.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9622.T's competition here
256A.T vs 6085.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 6085.T has a market cap of 32.2B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 6085.T trades at ¥2,804.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 6085.T's P/E ratio is -112.43. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 6085.T's ROE of -3.04%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 6085.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 6085.T's competition here
256A.T vs 2153.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 2153.T has a market cap of 32.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 2153.T trades at ¥1,776.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 2153.T's P/E ratio is 8.65. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 2153.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 2153.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 2153.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1866.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1866.T has a market cap of 29.6B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1866.T trades at ¥1,216.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1866.T's P/E ratio is 11.17. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1866.T's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1866.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1866.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1780.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1780.T has a market cap of 28.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1780.T trades at ¥1,507.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1780.T's P/E ratio is 8.11. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1780.T's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1780.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1780.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9768.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9768.T has a market cap of 28.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9768.T trades at ¥3,940.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9768.T's P/E ratio is 11.81. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9768.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 9768.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9768.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1805.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1805.T has a market cap of 27.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1805.T trades at ¥1,439.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1805.T's P/E ratio is 8.09. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1805.T's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1805.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1805.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1828.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1828.T has a market cap of 25.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1828.T trades at ¥2,458.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1828.T's P/E ratio is 9.17. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1828.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1828.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1828.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1726.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1726.T has a market cap of 23.8B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1726.T trades at ¥525.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1726.T's P/E ratio is 20.79. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1726.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1726.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1726.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9233.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9233.T has a market cap of 22.2B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9233.T trades at ¥1,222.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9233.T's P/E ratio is 12.33. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9233.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 9233.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9233.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9788.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9788.T has a market cap of 21.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9788.T trades at ¥523.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9788.T's P/E ratio is 14.50. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9788.T's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 9788.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9788.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9163.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9163.T has a market cap of 21B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9163.T trades at ¥2,405.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9163.T's P/E ratio is 10.13. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9163.T's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 9163.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9163.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1960.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1960.T has a market cap of 20.5B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1960.T trades at ¥1,335.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1960.T's P/E ratio is 8.06. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1960.T's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1960.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1960.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9765.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9765.T has a market cap of 19.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9765.T trades at ¥1,254.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9765.T's P/E ratio is 14.98. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9765.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 9765.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9765.T's competition here
256A.T vs 6540.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 6540.T has a market cap of 19.2B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 6540.T trades at ¥1,799.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 6540.T's P/E ratio is 12.66. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 6540.T's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 6540.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 6540.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1867.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1867.T has a market cap of 18.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1867.T trades at ¥2,842.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1867.T's P/E ratio is 7.98. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1867.T's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1867.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1867.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1776.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1776.T has a market cap of 18.4B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1776.T trades at ¥1,997.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1776.T's P/E ratio is 68.06. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1776.T's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 1776.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1776.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1716.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1716.T has a market cap of 16.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1716.T trades at ¥1,504.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1716.T's P/E ratio is 9.90. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1716.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1716.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1716.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1436.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1436.T has a market cap of 16.9B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1436.T trades at ¥4,105.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1436.T's P/E ratio is 50.16. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1436.T's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1436.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1436.T's competition here
256A.T vs 9612.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 9612.T has a market cap of 16.1B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 9612.T trades at ¥1,564.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 9612.T's P/E ratio is 7.74. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 9612.T's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 9612.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 9612.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1826.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1826.T has a market cap of 15.3B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1826.T trades at ¥1,070.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1826.T's P/E ratio is 21.81. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1826.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1826.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1826.T's competition here
256A.T vs 1770.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 1770.T has a market cap of 15.2B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 1770.T trades at ¥1,660.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 1770.T's P/E ratio is 11.69. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 1770.T's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is less volatile compared to 1770.T. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 1770.T's competition here
256A.T vs 5079.T Comparison April 2026
256A.T plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, 256A.T stands at 40.8B. In comparison, 5079.T has a market cap of 14.7B. Regarding current trading prices, 256A.T is priced at ¥2,128.00, while 5079.T trades at ¥2,849.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
256A.T currently has a P/E ratio of 10.94, whereas 5079.T's P/E ratio is 16.31. In terms of profitability, 256A.T's ROE is +0.10%, compared to 5079.T's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, 256A.T is more volatile compared to 5079.T. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for 256A.T.Check 5079.T's competition here