Agnico Eagle Mines Limited
Agnico Eagle Mines Limited AEM.TO Peers
See (AEM.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Gold Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AEM.TO | CA$159.77 | +0.43% | 82B | 25.19 | CA$6.44 | +1.38% |
| NGT.TO | CA$80.74 | +3.86% | 88.3B | 13.18 | CA$6.02 | +1.76% |
| WPM.TO | CA$121.13 | +1.19% | 55.6B | 65.84 | CA$1.86 | +0.71% |
| ABX.TO | CA$28.60 | +2.03% | 48.7B | 15.66 | CA$1.81 | +2.51% |
| FNV.TO | CA$221.30 | +0.11% | 43.1B | 50.81 | CA$4.40 | +1.01% |
| K.TO | CA$21.05 | +3.34% | 26.1B | 15.88 | CA$1.34 | +0.79% |
| NCM.TO | CA$20.65 | +2.03% | 18.5B | 17.21 | CA$1.20 | N/A |
| LUG.TO | CA$71.56 | +6.00% | 17.3B | 23.65 | CA$3.04 | +3.65% |
| AGI.TO | CA$36.41 | +3.75% | 15.2B | 42.61 | CA$0.85 | +0.42% |
| OGC.TO | CA$18.97 | +1.55% | 13.4B | 34.32 | CA$0.56 | +0.29% |
Stock Comparison
AEM.TO vs NGT.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, NGT.TO has a market cap of 88.3B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while NGT.TO trades at CA$80.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas NGT.TO's P/E ratio is 13.18. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to NGT.TO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to NGT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs WPM.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, WPM.TO has a market cap of 55.6B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while WPM.TO trades at CA$121.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas WPM.TO's P/E ratio is 65.84. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to WPM.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to WPM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ABX.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ABX.TO has a market cap of 48.7B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ABX.TO trades at CA$28.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ABX.TO's P/E ratio is 15.66. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ABX.TO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to ABX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs FNV.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, FNV.TO has a market cap of 43.1B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while FNV.TO trades at CA$221.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas FNV.TO's P/E ratio is 50.81. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FNV.TO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to FNV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs K.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, K.TO has a market cap of 26.1B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while K.TO trades at CA$21.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas K.TO's P/E ratio is 15.88. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to K.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to K.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs NCM.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, NCM.TO has a market cap of 18.5B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while NCM.TO trades at CA$20.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas NCM.TO's P/E ratio is 17.21. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to NCM.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to NCM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs LUG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, LUG.TO has a market cap of 17.3B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while LUG.TO trades at CA$71.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas LUG.TO's P/E ratio is 23.65. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to LUG.TO's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO and LUG.TO have similar daily volatility (2.29).
AEM.TO vs AGI.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, AGI.TO has a market cap of 15.2B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while AGI.TO trades at CA$36.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas AGI.TO's P/E ratio is 42.61. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to AGI.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to AGI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs OGC.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, OGC.TO has a market cap of 13.4B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while OGC.TO trades at CA$18.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas OGC.TO's P/E ratio is 34.32. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to OGC.TO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to OGC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs EDV.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, EDV.TO has a market cap of 10.2B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while EDV.TO trades at CA$41.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas EDV.TO's P/E ratio is -72.40. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to EDV.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to EDV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs YRI.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, YRI.TO has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while YRI.TO trades at CA$7.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas YRI.TO's P/E ratio is -5.72. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to YRI.TO's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to YRI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs OR.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, OR.TO has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while OR.TO trades at CA$34.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas OR.TO's P/E ratio is 152.17. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to OR.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to OR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs BTO.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, BTO.TO has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while BTO.TO trades at CA$4.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas BTO.TO's P/E ratio is -7.69. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BTO.TO's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to BTO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs IMG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, IMG.TO has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while IMG.TO trades at CA$9.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas IMG.TO's P/E ratio is 5.01. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to IMG.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to IMG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ELD.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ELD.TO has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ELD.TO trades at CA$27.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ELD.TO's P/E ratio is 12.32. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ELD.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to ELD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs NGD.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, NGD.TO has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while NGD.TO trades at CA$6.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas NGD.TO's P/E ratio is 27.08. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to NGD.TO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to NGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs OLA.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, OLA.TO has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while OLA.TO trades at CA$13.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas OLA.TO's P/E ratio is 36.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to OLA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to OLA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs PRU.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, PRU.TO has a market cap of 4.2B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while PRU.TO trades at CA$3.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas PRU.TO's P/E ratio is 8.80. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to PRU.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to PRU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs TXG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, TXG.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while TXG.TO trades at CA$43.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas TXG.TO's P/E ratio is 21.56. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to TXG.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to TXG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SSL.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SSL.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SSL.TO trades at CA$12.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SSL.TO's P/E ratio is 91.50. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SSL.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to SSL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs KNT.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, KNT.TO has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while KNT.TO trades at CA$14.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas KNT.TO's P/E ratio is 15.06. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to KNT.TO's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to KNT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs DPM.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, DPM.TO has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while DPM.TO trades at CA$21.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas DPM.TO's P/E ratio is 12.09. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to DPM.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to DPM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs EQX.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, EQX.TO has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while EQX.TO trades at CA$7.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas EQX.TO's P/E ratio is 8.10. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to EQX.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to EQX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SSRM.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SSRM.TO has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SSRM.TO trades at CA$17.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SSRM.TO's P/E ratio is 31.02. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SSRM.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to SSRM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs CEE.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, CEE.TO has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while CEE.TO trades at CA$2.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas CEE.TO's P/E ratio is 24.80. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CEE.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to CEE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs WDO.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, WDO.TO has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while WDO.TO trades at CA$18.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas WDO.TO's P/E ratio is 15.30. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to WDO.TO's ROE of +0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to WDO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ORA.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ORA.TO has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ORA.TO trades at CA$34.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ORA.TO's P/E ratio is -20.46. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ORA.TO's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to ORA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs CXB.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, CXB.TO has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while CXB.TO trades at CA$2.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas CXB.TO's P/E ratio is 29.90. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CXB.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to CXB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs WGX.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, WGX.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while WGX.TO trades at CA$2.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas WGX.TO's P/E ratio is 36.57. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to WGX.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to WGX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs NG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, NG.TO has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while NG.TO trades at CA$5.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas NG.TO's P/E ratio is -15.56. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to NG.TO's ROE of +1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to NG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs AAUC.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, AAUC.TO has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while AAUC.TO trades at CA$18.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas AAUC.TO's P/E ratio is -12.03. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to AAUC.TO's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to AAUC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs CG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, CG.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while CG.TO trades at CA$9.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas CG.TO's P/E ratio is 39.24. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CG.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to CG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SEA.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SEA.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SEA.TO trades at CA$20.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SEA.TO's P/E ratio is -131.80. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SEA.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to SEA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs OSK.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, OSK.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while OSK.TO trades at CA$4.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas OSK.TO's P/E ratio is -489.50. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to OSK.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to OSK.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs CNL.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, CNL.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while CNL.TO trades at CA$15.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas CNL.TO's P/E ratio is -22.58. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CNL.TO's ROE of -1.14%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to CNL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SBB.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SBB.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SBB.TO trades at CA$2.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SBB.TO's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SBB.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to SBB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs KRR.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, KRR.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while KRR.TO trades at CA$6.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas KRR.TO's P/E ratio is 83.75. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to KRR.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to KRR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs RUP.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, RUP.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while RUP.TO trades at CA$4.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas RUP.TO's P/E ratio is -159.33. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to RUP.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to RUP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ASE.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ASE.CN has a market cap of 761.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ASE.CN trades at CA$1.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ASE.CN's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ASE.CN's ROE of -30.89%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to ASE.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs MSA.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, MSA.TO has a market cap of 743.3M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while MSA.TO trades at CA$2.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas MSA.TO's P/E ratio is 5.06. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to MSA.TO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to MSA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs GTWO.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, GTWO.TO has a market cap of 684.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while GTWO.TO trades at CA$2.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas GTWO.TO's P/E ratio is -71.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to GTWO.TO's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to GTWO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs IAU.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, IAU.TO has a market cap of 663.8M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while IAU.TO trades at CA$0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas IAU.TO's P/E ratio is -1.62. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to IAU.TO's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to IAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs AR.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, AR.TO has a market cap of 659.9M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while AR.TO trades at CA$0.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas AR.TO's P/E ratio is -1.44. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to AR.TO's ROE of -0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to AR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ORE.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ORE.TO has a market cap of 605.2M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ORE.TO trades at CA$1.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ORE.TO's P/E ratio is 6.33. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ORE.TO's ROE of +0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to ORE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs MND.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, MND.TO has a market cap of 454.4M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while MND.TO trades at CA$4.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas MND.TO's P/E ratio is 5.93. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to MND.TO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to MND.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs GAU.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, GAU.TO has a market cap of 445.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while GAU.TO trades at CA$1.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas GAU.TO's P/E ratio is -17.30. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to GAU.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to GAU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs PRB.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, PRB.TO has a market cap of 438.6M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while PRB.TO trades at CA$2.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas PRB.TO's P/E ratio is -13.44. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to PRB.TO's ROE of -1.13%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to PRB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SGD.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SGD.CN has a market cap of 416.3M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SGD.CN trades at CA$3.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SGD.CN's P/E ratio is -28.64. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SGD.CN's ROE of -0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to SGD.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs MOZ.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, MOZ.TO has a market cap of 380M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while MOZ.TO trades at CA$0.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas MOZ.TO's P/E ratio is -16.20. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to MOZ.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to MOZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs FDR.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, FDR.V has a market cap of 374.8M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while FDR.V trades at CA$4.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas FDR.V's P/E ratio is -31.69. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FDR.V's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to FDR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs STGO.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, STGO.TO has a market cap of 311M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while STGO.TO trades at CA$1.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas STGO.TO's P/E ratio is 4.73. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to STGO.TO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to STGO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs JAG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, JAG.TO has a market cap of 269.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while JAG.TO trades at CA$3.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas JAG.TO's P/E ratio is -30.91. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to JAG.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to JAG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SBI.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SBI.TO has a market cap of 245.4M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SBI.TO trades at CA$3.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SBI.TO's P/E ratio is 5.40. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SBI.TO's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to SBI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ITH.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ITH.TO has a market cap of 243.2M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ITH.TO trades at CA$1.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ITH.TO's P/E ratio is -39.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ITH.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to ITH.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs FF.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, FF.TO has a market cap of 200.4M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while FF.TO trades at CA$0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas FF.TO's P/E ratio is -9.25. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to FF.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to FF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs GOLD.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, GOLD.TO has a market cap of 192.1M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while GOLD.TO trades at CA$0.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas GOLD.TO's P/E ratio is -7.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to GOLD.TO's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to GOLD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs DNG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, DNG.TO has a market cap of 190.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while DNG.TO trades at CA$4.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas DNG.TO's P/E ratio is 7.27. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to DNG.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to DNG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs VGZ.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, VGZ.TO has a market cap of 166.6M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while VGZ.TO trades at CA$1.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas VGZ.TO's P/E ratio is 12.14. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VGZ.TO's ROE of +0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to VGZ.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs LGD.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, LGD.TO has a market cap of 147.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while LGD.TO trades at CA$0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas LGD.TO's P/E ratio is -4.64. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to LGD.TO's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to LGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs BSX.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, BSX.TO has a market cap of 144.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while BSX.TO trades at CA$0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas BSX.TO's P/E ratio is -10.33. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BSX.TO's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to BSX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs TNX.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, TNX.TO has a market cap of 128.4M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while TNX.TO trades at CA$0.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas TNX.TO's P/E ratio is 46.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to TNX.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to TNX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ELO.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ELO.TO has a market cap of 119.4M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ELO.TO trades at CA$1.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ELO.TO's P/E ratio is -9.77. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ELO.TO's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to ELO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs COG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, COG.TO has a market cap of 114.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while COG.TO trades at CA$0.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas COG.TO's P/E ratio is -56.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to COG.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to COG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs G.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, G.TO has a market cap of 111.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while G.TO trades at CA$1.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas G.TO's P/E ratio is -13.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to G.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to G.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs NEXG.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, NEXG.V has a market cap of 106.9M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while NEXG.V trades at CA$0.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas NEXG.V's P/E ratio is -2.39. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to NEXG.V's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to NEXG.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs STLR.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, STLR.TO has a market cap of 104.1M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while STLR.TO trades at CA$0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas STLR.TO's P/E ratio is -3.36. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to STLR.TO's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to STLR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SANU.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SANU.CN has a market cap of 102.8M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SANU.CN trades at CA$0.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SANU.CN's P/E ratio is -24.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SANU.CN's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to SANU.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs MAW.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, MAW.TO has a market cap of 102M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while MAW.TO trades at CA$0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas MAW.TO's P/E ratio is -17.25. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to MAW.TO's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to MAW.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs CBR.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, CBR.V has a market cap of 95.1M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while CBR.V trades at CA$0.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas CBR.V's P/E ratio is -9.12. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CBR.V's ROE of -1.22%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to CBR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs XTG.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, XTG.TO has a market cap of 94.2M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while XTG.TO trades at CA$2.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas XTG.TO's P/E ratio is 29.29. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to XTG.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to XTG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs LN.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, LN.TO has a market cap of 93M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while LN.TO trades at CA$0.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas LN.TO's P/E ratio is -10.60. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to LN.TO's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to LN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs GHRT.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, GHRT.V has a market cap of 91M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while GHRT.V trades at CA$0.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas GHRT.V's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to GHRT.V's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to GHRT.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs BLLG.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, BLLG.CN has a market cap of 90.6M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while BLLG.CN trades at CA$0.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas BLLG.CN's P/E ratio is -25.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BLLG.CN's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to BLLG.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SIG.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SIG.CN has a market cap of 80M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SIG.CN trades at CA$0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SIG.CN's P/E ratio is -32.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SIG.CN's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to SIG.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs CCM.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, CCM.TO has a market cap of 69M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while CCM.TO trades at CA$0.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas CCM.TO's P/E ratio is -37.50. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CCM.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to CCM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs HMR.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, HMR.V has a market cap of 66.9M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while HMR.V trades at CA$1.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas HMR.V's P/E ratio is -15.29. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to HMR.V's ROE of -5.38%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to HMR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs VEIN.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, VEIN.V has a market cap of 66.1M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while VEIN.V trades at CA$0.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas VEIN.V's P/E ratio is -3.25. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VEIN.V's ROE of +1.47%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to VEIN.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs TML.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, TML.TO has a market cap of 64.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while TML.TO trades at CA$0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas TML.TO's P/E ratio is -3.14. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to TML.TO's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to TML.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs CGC.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, CGC.V has a market cap of 59M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while CGC.V trades at CA$0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas CGC.V's P/E ratio is -28.50. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CGC.V's ROE of +13.62%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to CGC.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ESM.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ESM.TO has a market cap of 53.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ESM.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ESM.TO's P/E ratio is 13.50. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ESM.TO's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to ESM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs ME.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, ME.TO has a market cap of 50.9M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while ME.TO trades at CA$0.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas ME.TO's P/E ratio is -1.85. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to ME.TO's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to ME.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs USGD.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, USGD.CN has a market cap of 50.4M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while USGD.CN trades at CA$0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas USGD.CN's P/E ratio is 23.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to USGD.CN's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to USGD.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs RISE.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, RISE.CN has a market cap of 47.3M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while RISE.CN trades at CA$0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas RISE.CN's P/E ratio is -2.71. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to RISE.CN's ROE of -1.22%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to RISE.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs NHK.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, NHK.TO has a market cap of 39M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while NHK.TO trades at CA$0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas NHK.TO's P/E ratio is -2.60. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to NHK.TO's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to NHK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs BNN.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, BNN.CN has a market cap of 38M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while BNN.CN trades at CA$0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas BNN.CN's P/E ratio is -3.38. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to BNN.CN's ROE of -1.23%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to BNN.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs NVO.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, NVO.TO has a market cap of 37.2M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while NVO.TO trades at CA$0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas NVO.TO's P/E ratio is -0.81. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to NVO.TO's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to NVO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs VLC.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, VLC.V has a market cap of 35.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while VLC.V trades at CA$0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas VLC.V's P/E ratio is -18.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VLC.V's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to VLC.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs AMM.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, AMM.TO has a market cap of 33.6M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while AMM.TO trades at CA$0.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas AMM.TO's P/E ratio is -12.25. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to AMM.TO's ROE of -1.04%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to AMM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs VGCX.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, VGCX.TO has a market cap of 32.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while VGCX.TO trades at CA$0.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas VGCX.TO's P/E ratio is 2.09. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VGCX.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to VGCX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs SGNL.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, SGNL.TO has a market cap of 32.1M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while SGNL.TO trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas SGNL.TO's P/E ratio is -1.42. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to SGNL.TO's ROE of -0.91%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to SGNL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs NOM.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, NOM.CN has a market cap of 30.1M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while NOM.CN trades at CA$0.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas NOM.CN's P/E ratio is -10.75. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to NOM.CN's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to NOM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs GTCH.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, GTCH.CN has a market cap of 28.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while GTCH.CN trades at CA$0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas GTCH.CN's P/E ratio is -11.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to GTCH.CN's ROE of +1.57%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to GTCH.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs AUOZ.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, AUOZ.CN has a market cap of 26.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while AUOZ.CN trades at CA$0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas AUOZ.CN's P/E ratio is -9.50. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to AUOZ.CN's ROE of -0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to AUOZ.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs WG.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, WG.CN has a market cap of 25M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while WG.CN trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas WG.CN's P/E ratio is -7.75. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to WG.CN's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to WG.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs IRV.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, IRV.CN has a market cap of 24.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while IRV.CN trades at CA$0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas IRV.CN's P/E ratio is -16.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to IRV.CN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to IRV.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs VAU.V Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, VAU.V has a market cap of 23.3M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while VAU.V trades at CA$0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas VAU.V's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to VAU.V's ROE of -1.86%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to VAU.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs QIM.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, QIM.CN has a market cap of 19.7M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while QIM.CN trades at CA$0.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas QIM.CN's P/E ratio is -3.86. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to QIM.CN's ROE of -0.73%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to QIM.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs CTOC.CN Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, CTOC.CN has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while CTOC.CN trades at CA$0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas CTOC.CN's P/E ratio is -1.71. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to CTOC.CN's ROE of -1.38%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is less volatile compared to CTOC.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.
AEM.TO vs YRB.TO Comparison
AEM.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, AEM.TO stands at 82B. In comparison, YRB.TO has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, AEM.TO is priced at CA$159.77, while YRB.TO trades at CA$0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
AEM.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 25.19, whereas YRB.TO's P/E ratio is 1.00. In terms of profitability, AEM.TO's ROE is +0.11%, compared to YRB.TO's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, AEM.TO is more volatile compared to YRB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for AEM.TO.