Calfrac Well Services Ltd.
Calfrac Well Services Ltd. CFW.TO Peers
See (CFW.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Oil & Gas Equipment & Services Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CFW.TO | $3.36 | -3.17% | 288.59M | 33.60 | $0.10 | N/A |
| TVK.TO | $165.27 | -3.02% | 3.22B | 43.84 | $3.77 | +0.39% |
| CEU.TO | $6.24 | -0.32% | 1.40B | 8.10 | $0.77 | +2.12% |
| EFX.TO | $9.98 | -0.50% | 1.24B | 11.88 | $0.84 | +1.25% |
| SCL.TO | $16.57 | +1.04% | 1.15B | 552.33 | $0.03 | N/A |
| PSI.TO | $11.72 | -1.10% | 930.93M | 13.02 | $0.90 | +4.40% |
| TCW.TO | $4.44 | +1.37% | 836.37M | 8.54 | $0.52 | +4.13% |
| NOA.TO | $24.04 | +2.25% | 713.93M | 15.82 | $1.52 | +1.83% |
| MATR.TO | $10.37 | -7.74% | 646.51M | -115.22 | -$0.09 | N/A |
| TOT.TO | $10.22 | -1.35% | 388.88M | 6.68 | $1.53 | +3.60% |
Stock Comparison
CFW.TO vs TVK.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, TVK.TO has a market cap of 3.22B. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while TVK.TO trades at $165.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas TVK.TO's P/E ratio is 43.84. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to TVK.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to TVK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs CEU.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, CEU.TO has a market cap of 1.40B. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while CEU.TO trades at $6.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas CEU.TO's P/E ratio is 8.10. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to CEU.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is more volatile compared to CEU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs EFX.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, EFX.TO has a market cap of 1.24B. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while EFX.TO trades at $9.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas EFX.TO's P/E ratio is 11.88. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to EFX.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is more volatile compared to EFX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs SCL.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, SCL.TO has a market cap of 1.15B. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while SCL.TO trades at $16.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas SCL.TO's P/E ratio is 552.33. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to SCL.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is more volatile compared to SCL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs PSI.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, PSI.TO has a market cap of 930.93M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while PSI.TO trades at $11.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas PSI.TO's P/E ratio is 13.02. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to PSI.TO's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is more volatile compared to PSI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs TCW.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, TCW.TO has a market cap of 836.37M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while TCW.TO trades at $4.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas TCW.TO's P/E ratio is 8.54. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to TCW.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to TCW.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs NOA.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, NOA.TO has a market cap of 713.93M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while NOA.TO trades at $24.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas NOA.TO's P/E ratio is 15.82. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to NOA.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to NOA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs MATR.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, MATR.TO has a market cap of 646.51M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while MATR.TO trades at $10.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas MATR.TO's P/E ratio is -115.22. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to MATR.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to MATR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs TOT.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, TOT.TO has a market cap of 388.88M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while TOT.TO trades at $10.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas TOT.TO's P/E ratio is 6.68. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to TOT.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is more volatile compared to TOT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs STEP.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, STEP.TO has a market cap of 285.77M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while STEP.TO trades at $3.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas STEP.TO's P/E ratio is 198.50. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to STEP.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to STEP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs PSD.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, PSD.TO has a market cap of 133.59M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while PSD.TO trades at $2.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas PSD.TO's P/E ratio is 9.39. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to PSD.TO's ROE of +0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to PSD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs E.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, E.TO has a market cap of 131.80M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while E.TO trades at $1.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas E.TO's P/E ratio is 24.29. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to E.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to E.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs MCB.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, MCB.TO has a market cap of 98.66M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while MCB.TO trades at $3.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas MCB.TO's P/E ratio is 11.71. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to MCB.TO's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to MCB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs ESN.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, ESN.TO has a market cap of 49.57M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while ESN.TO trades at $0.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas ESN.TO's P/E ratio is 39.50. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to ESN.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is more volatile compared to ESN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs SFD.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, SFD.TO has a market cap of 42.92M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while SFD.TO trades at $0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas SFD.TO's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to SFD.TO's ROE of -2.83%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is less volatile compared to SFD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs HWO.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, HWO.TO has a market cap of 10.16M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while HWO.TO trades at $0.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas HWO.TO's P/E ratio is -0.79. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to HWO.TO's ROE of +0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is more volatile compared to HWO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.
CFW.TO vs BRY.TO Comparison
CFW.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CFW.TO stands at 288.59M. In comparison, BRY.TO has a market cap of 6.87M. Regarding current trading prices, CFW.TO is priced at $3.36, while BRY.TO trades at $0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CFW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 33.60, whereas BRY.TO's P/E ratio is -1.73. In terms of profitability, CFW.TO's ROE is +0.02%, compared to BRY.TO's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CFW.TO is more volatile compared to BRY.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CFW.TO.