Canadian General Investments, Limited (CGI.TO) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (CGI.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Asset Management Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGI.TO | CA$50.46 | -1.06% | 1.1B | 2.82 | CA$18.16 | +2.25% |
| BLK.NE | CA$24.99 | -0.68% | 198.8B | 23.34 | CA$1.07 | +2.25% |
| BN.TO | CA$61.21 | +0.25% | 136.3B | 30.04 | CA$2.03 | +0.59% |
| BAM.TO | CA$64.12 | +0.34% | 101.2B | 27.43 | CA$2.31 | +4.10% |
| PHYS.TO | CA$43.77 | +2.55% | 20.5B | 2.71 | CA$15.90 | N/A |
| IGM.TO | CA$76.85 | -0.94% | 18B | 16.16 | CA$4.78 | +2.99% |
| PSLV.TO | CA$26.90 | +4.43% | 16.6B | 1.38 | CA$18.87 | N/A |
| VEQT.TO | CA$60.94 | +0.38% | 14.7B | 21.67 | CA$2.80 | +1.25% |
| CEF.TO | CA$57.66 | +2.93% | 10.5B | 7.85 | CA$7.26 | N/A |
| VGRO.TO | CA$47.51 | +0.38% | 10.2B | 21.63 | CA$2.19 | +1.70% |
Stock Comparison
CGI.TO vs BLK.NE Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, BLK.NE has a market cap of 198.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while BLK.NE trades at CA$24.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas BLK.NE's P/E ratio is 23.34. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BLK.NE's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to BLK.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check BLK.NE's competition here
CGI.TO vs BN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, BN.TO has a market cap of 136.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while BN.TO trades at CA$61.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas BN.TO's P/E ratio is 30.04. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BN.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to BN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check BN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs BAM.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, BAM.TO has a market cap of 101.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while BAM.TO trades at CA$64.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas BAM.TO's P/E ratio is 27.43. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BAM.TO's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to BAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check BAM.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs PHYS.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, PHYS.TO has a market cap of 20.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while PHYS.TO trades at CA$43.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas PHYS.TO's P/E ratio is 2.71. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to PHYS.TO's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to PHYS.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check PHYS.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs IGM.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, IGM.TO has a market cap of 18B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while IGM.TO trades at CA$76.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas IGM.TO's P/E ratio is 16.16. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to IGM.TO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to IGM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check IGM.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs PSLV.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, PSLV.TO has a market cap of 16.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while PSLV.TO trades at CA$26.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas PSLV.TO's P/E ratio is 1.38. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to PSLV.TO's ROE of +0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to PSLV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check PSLV.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs VEQT.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, VEQT.TO has a market cap of 14.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while VEQT.TO trades at CA$60.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas VEQT.TO's P/E ratio is 21.67. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VEQT.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to VEQT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check VEQT.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs CEF.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, CEF.TO has a market cap of 10.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while CEF.TO trades at CA$57.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas CEF.TO's P/E ratio is 7.85. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CEF.TO's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to CEF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check CEF.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs VGRO.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, VGRO.TO has a market cap of 10.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while VGRO.TO trades at CA$47.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas VGRO.TO's P/E ratio is 21.63. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VGRO.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to VGRO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check VGRO.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FBAL.NE Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FBAL.NE has a market cap of 9B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FBAL.NE trades at CA$15.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FBAL.NE's P/E ratio is 18.85. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FBAL.NE's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FBAL.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FBAL.NE's competition here
CGI.TO vs ONEX.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, ONEX.TO has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while ONEX.TO trades at CA$105.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas ONEX.TO's P/E ratio is 9.22. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ONEX.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to ONEX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check ONEX.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs PMEI-UN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, PMEI-UN.TO has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while PMEI-UN.TO trades at CA$8.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas PMEI-UN.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to PMEI-UN.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to PMEI-UN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check PMEI-UN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs ZLB.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, ZLB.TO has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while ZLB.TO trades at CA$62.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas ZLB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ZLB.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to ZLB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check ZLB.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs VBAL.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, VBAL.TO has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while VBAL.TO trades at CA$39.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas VBAL.TO's P/E ratio is 21.56. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VBAL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to VBAL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check VBAL.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs CSAV.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, CSAV.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while CSAV.TO trades at CA$50.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas CSAV.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CSAV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to CSAV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check CSAV.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FGRO.NE Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FGRO.NE has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FGRO.NE trades at CA$18.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FGRO.NE's P/E ratio is 19.93. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FGRO.NE's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FGRO.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FGRO.NE's competition here
CGI.TO vs CIX.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, CIX.TO has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while CIX.TO trades at CA$31.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas CIX.TO's P/E ratio is -15.84. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CIX.TO's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to CIX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check CIX.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs SII.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, SII.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while SII.TO trades at CA$160.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas SII.TO's P/E ratio is 34.46. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to SII.TO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to SII.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check SII.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs XGD.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, XGD.TO has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while XGD.TO trades at CA$49.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas XGD.TO's P/E ratio is 14.72. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to XGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to XGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check XGD.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FCUV.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FCUV.TO has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FCUV.TO trades at CA$27.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FCUV.TO's P/E ratio is 17.23. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FCUV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to FCUV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FCUV.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs CGL.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, CGL.TO has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while CGL.TO trades at CA$31.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas CGL.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CGL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to CGL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check CGL.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs EIT-UN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, EIT-UN.TO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while EIT-UN.TO trades at CA$17.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas EIT-UN.TO's P/E ratio is 7.46. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to EIT-UN.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to EIT-UN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check EIT-UN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs BBUC.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, BBUC.TO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while BBUC.TO trades at CA$45.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas BBUC.TO's P/E ratio is 3.94. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BBUC.TO's ROE of -0.75%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to BBUC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check BBUC.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs PFMN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, PFMN.TO has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while PFMN.TO trades at CA$16.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas PFMN.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to PFMN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to PFMN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check PFMN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs ZLU.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, ZLU.TO has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while ZLU.TO trades at CA$64.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas ZLU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ZLU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to ZLU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check ZLU.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FCUQ.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FCUQ.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FCUQ.TO trades at CA$73.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FCUQ.TO's P/E ratio is 27.28. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FCUQ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FCUQ.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FCUQ.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs NSCE.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, NSCE.TO has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while NSCE.TO trades at CA$52.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas NSCE.TO's P/E ratio is 20.27. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NSCE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to NSCE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check NSCE.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs LUNR.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, LUNR.TO has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while LUNR.TO trades at CA$19.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas LUNR.TO's P/E ratio is -1900.00. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to LUNR.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to LUNR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check LUNR.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FCNS.NE Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FCNS.NE has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FCNS.NE trades at CA$12.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FCNS.NE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FCNS.NE's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FCNS.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FCNS.NE's competition here
CGI.TO vs CYB.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, CYB.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while CYB.TO trades at CA$89.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas CYB.TO's P/E ratio is 8.28. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CYB.TO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to CYB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check CYB.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FIH-U.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FIH-U.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FIH-U.TO trades at CA$18.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FIH-U.TO's P/E ratio is 5.79. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FIH-U.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to FIH-U.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FIH-U.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs NREA.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, NREA.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while NREA.TO trades at CA$29.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas NREA.TO's P/E ratio is 25.26. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NREA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to NREA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check NREA.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs UNC.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, UNC.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while UNC.TO trades at CA$15.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas UNC.TO's P/E ratio is 5.76. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to UNC.TO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to UNC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check UNC.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs GCG-A.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, GCG-A.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while GCG-A.TO trades at CA$67.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas GCG-A.TO's P/E ratio is 9.09. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to GCG-A.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to GCG-A.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check GCG-A.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs GCG.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, GCG.TO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while GCG.TO trades at CA$67.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas GCG.TO's P/E ratio is 9.09. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to GCG.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to GCG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check GCG.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs RIIN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, RIIN.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while RIIN.TO trades at CA$24.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas RIIN.TO's P/E ratio is 23.21. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to RIIN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to RIIN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check RIIN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs PFIA.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, PFIA.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while PFIA.TO trades at CA$10.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas PFIA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to PFIA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to PFIA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check PFIA.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs DFN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, DFN.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while DFN.TO trades at CA$8.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas DFN.TO's P/E ratio is 4.69. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to DFN.TO's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to DFN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check DFN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs EVT.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, EVT.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while EVT.TO trades at CA$23.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas EVT.TO's P/E ratio is 0.46. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to EVT.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to EVT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check EVT.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs AGF-B.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, AGF-B.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while AGF-B.TO trades at CA$19.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas AGF-B.TO's P/E ratio is 9.28. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to AGF-B.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to AGF-B.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check AGF-B.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs PFLS.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, PFLS.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while PFLS.TO trades at CA$22.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas PFLS.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to PFLS.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to PFLS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check PFLS.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs XRE.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, XRE.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while XRE.TO trades at CA$17.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas XRE.TO's P/E ratio is 15.71. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to XRE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to XRE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check XRE.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs CVG.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, CVG.TO has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while CVG.TO trades at CA$76.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas CVG.TO's P/E ratio is 14.64. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CVG.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to CVG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check CVG.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs HCAL.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, HCAL.TO has a market cap of 964.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while HCAL.TO trades at CA$49.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas HCAL.TO's P/E ratio is 18.82. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HCAL.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to HCAL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check HCAL.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs SEC.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, SEC.TO has a market cap of 964.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while SEC.TO trades at CA$398.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas SEC.TO's P/E ratio is 2.24. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to SEC.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to SEC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check SEC.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs TQSM.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, TQSM.TO has a market cap of 958M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while TQSM.TO trades at CA$30.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas TQSM.TO's P/E ratio is 18.30. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to TQSM.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to TQSM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check TQSM.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FTN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FTN.TO has a market cap of 914.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FTN.TO trades at CA$11.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FTN.TO's P/E ratio is 3.84. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FTN.TO's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FTN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FTN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs VCNS.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, VCNS.TO has a market cap of 891.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while VCNS.TO trades at CA$33.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas VCNS.TO's P/E ratio is 21.49. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VCNS.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to VCNS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check VCNS.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs LBS.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, LBS.TO has a market cap of 883.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while LBS.TO trades at CA$13.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas LBS.TO's P/E ratio is 2.84. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to LBS.TO's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to LBS.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check LBS.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FCCV.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FCCV.TO has a market cap of 834.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FCCV.TO trades at CA$23.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FCCV.TO's P/E ratio is 15.74. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FCCV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FCCV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FCCV.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs VBU.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, VBU.TO has a market cap of 798.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while VBU.TO trades at CA$22.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas VBU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VBU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to VBU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check VBU.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs 0P0000VGMF.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, 0P0000VGMF.TO has a market cap of 790.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while 0P0000VGMF.TO trades at CA$17.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas 0P0000VGMF.TO's P/E ratio is 22.31. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to 0P0000VGMF.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to 0P0000VGMF.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check 0P0000VGMF.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs BK.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, BK.TO has a market cap of 754.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while BK.TO trades at CA$16.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas BK.TO's P/E ratio is 3.92. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BK.TO's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to BK.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check BK.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs BK-PA.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, BK-PA.TO has a market cap of 750.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while BK-PA.TO trades at CA$10.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas BK-PA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BK-PA.TO's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to BK-PA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check BK-PA.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FFN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FFN.TO has a market cap of 724.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FFN.TO trades at CA$11.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FFN.TO's P/E ratio is 5.21. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FFN.TO's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to FFN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FFN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FCCQ.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FCCQ.TO has a market cap of 690.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FCCQ.TO trades at CA$51.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FCCQ.TO's P/E ratio is 20.24. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FCCQ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FCCQ.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FCCQ.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs QRC.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, QRC.TO has a market cap of 663.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while QRC.TO trades at CA$12.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas QRC.TO's P/E ratio is 1.50. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to QRC.TO's ROE of +0.78%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to QRC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check QRC.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs ZRE.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, ZRE.TO has a market cap of 633M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while ZRE.TO trades at CA$24.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas ZRE.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ZRE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to ZRE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check ZRE.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs SPPP.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, SPPP.TO has a market cap of 626.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while SPPP.TO trades at CA$18.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas SPPP.TO's P/E ratio is -4.55. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to SPPP.TO's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to SPPP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check SPPP.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FTN-PA.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FTN-PA.TO has a market cap of 623.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FTN-PA.TO trades at CA$10.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FTN-PA.TO's P/E ratio is 2.81. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FTN-PA.TO's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FTN-PA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FTN-PA.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs VBG.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, VBG.TO has a market cap of 587.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while VBG.TO trades at CA$23.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas VBG.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VBG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to VBG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check VBG.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs CAFR.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, CAFR.TO has a market cap of 553.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while CAFR.TO trades at CA$19.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas CAFR.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CAFR.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to CAFR.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check CAFR.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FSZ.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FSZ.TO has a market cap of 549.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FSZ.TO trades at CA$5.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FSZ.TO's P/E ratio is 9.60. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FSZ.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to FSZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FSZ.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs 0P00007083.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, 0P00007083.TO has a market cap of 548.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while 0P00007083.TO trades at CA$24.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas 0P00007083.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to 0P00007083.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to 0P00007083.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check 0P00007083.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs 0P0001513M.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, 0P0001513M.TO has a market cap of 533M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while 0P0001513M.TO trades at CA$21.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas 0P0001513M.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to 0P0001513M.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to 0P0001513M.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check 0P0001513M.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs ZGI.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, ZGI.TO has a market cap of 529.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while ZGI.TO trades at CA$61.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas ZGI.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ZGI.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to ZGI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check ZGI.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs DGS.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, DGS.TO has a market cap of 482.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while DGS.TO trades at CA$8.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas DGS.TO's P/E ratio is 3.73. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to DGS.TO's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to DGS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check DGS.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FCCB.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FCCB.TO has a market cap of 475.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FCCB.TO trades at CA$22.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FCCB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FCCB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FCCB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FCCB.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs RIT.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, RIT.TO has a market cap of 431.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while RIT.TO trades at CA$18.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas RIT.TO's P/E ratio is -11.91. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to RIT.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to RIT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check RIT.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs SBC.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, SBC.TO has a market cap of 427M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while SBC.TO trades at CA$16.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas SBC.TO's P/E ratio is 3.24. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to SBC.TO's ROE of +0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to SBC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check SBC.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs HFIN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, HFIN.TO has a market cap of 424.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while HFIN.TO trades at CA$32.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas HFIN.TO's P/E ratio is 17.81. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HFIN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to HFIN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check HFIN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs TINF.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, TINF.TO has a market cap of 404.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while TINF.TO trades at CA$27.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas TINF.TO's P/E ratio is 22.93. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to TINF.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to TINF.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check TINF.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs URB.CN Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, URB.CN has a market cap of 404M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while URB.CN trades at CA$8.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas URB.CN's P/E ratio is 3.69. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to URB.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to URB.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check URB.CN's competition here
CGI.TO vs DANC.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, DANC.TO has a market cap of 387.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while DANC.TO trades at CA$22.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas DANC.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to DANC.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to DANC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check DANC.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs CEW.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, CEW.TO has a market cap of 383.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while CEW.TO trades at CA$34.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas CEW.TO's P/E ratio is 17.60. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CEW.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to CEW.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check CEW.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs HQU.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, HQU.TO has a market cap of 376.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while HQU.TO trades at CA$24.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas HQU.TO's P/E ratio is 35.25. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HQU.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to HQU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check HQU.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs PFAE.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, PFAE.TO has a market cap of 370.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while PFAE.TO trades at CA$29.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas PFAE.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to PFAE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to PFAE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check PFAE.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs URB-A.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, URB-A.TO has a market cap of 365M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while URB-A.TO trades at CA$8.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas URB-A.TO's P/E ratio is 3.40. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to URB-A.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to URB-A.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check URB-A.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs 0P0001513J.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, 0P0001513J.TO has a market cap of 363.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while 0P0001513J.TO trades at CA$36.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas 0P0001513J.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to 0P0001513J.TO's ROE of -0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to 0P0001513J.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check 0P0001513J.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs URB.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, URB.TO has a market cap of 362.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while URB.TO trades at CA$8.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas URB.TO's P/E ratio is 3.71. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to URB.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to URB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check URB.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs NGPE.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, NGPE.TO has a market cap of 361.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while NGPE.TO trades at CA$44.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas NGPE.TO's P/E ratio is 17.07. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NGPE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to NGPE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check NGPE.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs MSTE.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, MSTE.TO has a market cap of 359.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while MSTE.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.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas MSTE.TO's P/E ratio is 2.63. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to MSTE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to MSTE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check MSTE.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs VRIF.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, VRIF.TO has a market cap of 358.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while VRIF.TO trades at CA$27.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas VRIF.TO's P/E ratio is 20.05. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VRIF.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to VRIF.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check VRIF.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs URB-A.CN Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, URB-A.CN has a market cap of 356.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while URB-A.CN trades at CA$8.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas URB-A.CN's P/E ratio is 3.47. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to URB-A.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to URB-A.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check URB-A.CN's competition here
CGI.TO vs NALT.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, NALT.TO has a market cap of 353.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while NALT.TO trades at CA$22.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas NALT.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NALT.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to NALT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check NALT.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs XBM.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, XBM.TO has a market cap of 352.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while XBM.TO trades at CA$35.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas XBM.TO's P/E ratio is 17.11. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to XBM.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to XBM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check XBM.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs ZFN.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, ZFN.TO has a market cap of 351.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while ZFN.TO trades at CA$64.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas ZFN.TO's P/E ratio is 26.25. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ZFN.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to ZFN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check ZFN.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FLCD.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FLCD.TO has a market cap of 349M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FLCD.TO trades at CA$23.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FLCD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FLCD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FLCD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FLCD.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs NNRG.NE Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, NNRG.NE has a market cap of 344.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while NNRG.NE trades at CA$77.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas NNRG.NE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NNRG.NE's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to NNRG.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check NNRG.NE's competition here
CGI.TO vs QBTL.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, QBTL.TO has a market cap of 341.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while QBTL.TO trades at CA$11.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas QBTL.TO's P/E ratio is 16.73. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to QBTL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to QBTL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check QBTL.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs QBTC.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, QBTC.TO has a market cap of 334M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while QBTC.TO trades at CA$78.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas QBTC.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to QBTC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to QBTC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check QBTC.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs DRMU.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, DRMU.TO has a market cap of 319.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while DRMU.TO trades at CA$54.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas DRMU.TO's P/E ratio is 27.55. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to DRMU.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to DRMU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check DRMU.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FCAM.NE Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FCAM.NE has a market cap of 318.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FCAM.NE trades at CA$16.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FCAM.NE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FCAM.NE's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to FCAM.NE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FCAM.NE's competition here
CGI.TO vs RCG-PB.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, RCG-PB.TO has a market cap of 314.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while RCG-PB.TO trades at CA$25.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas RCG-PB.TO's P/E ratio is -10.15. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to RCG-PB.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to RCG-PB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check RCG-PB.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs RCG.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, RCG.TO has a market cap of 314.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while RCG.TO trades at CA$19.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas RCG.TO's P/E ratio is -27.01. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to RCG.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to RCG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check RCG.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs STCK.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, STCK.TO has a market cap of 310.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while STCK.TO trades at CA$20.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas STCK.TO's P/E ratio is 4.50. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to STCK.TO's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to STCK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check STCK.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs FCVH.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, FCVH.TO has a market cap of 307.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while FCVH.TO trades at CA$24.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas FCVH.TO's P/E ratio is 16.69. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FCVH.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to FCVH.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check FCVH.TO's competition here
CGI.TO vs RTA.NE Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, RTA.NE has a market cap of 306.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while RTA.NE trades at CA$35.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas RTA.NE's P/E ratio is 23.26. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to RTA.NE's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is more volatile compared to RTA.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check RTA.NE's competition here
CGI.TO vs ZGD.TO Comparison June 2026
CGI.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CGI.TO stands at 1.1B. In comparison, ZGD.TO has a market cap of 283.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CGI.TO is priced at CA$50.46, while ZGD.TO trades at CA$271.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CGI.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.82, whereas ZGD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CGI.TO's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ZGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CGI.TO is less volatile compared to ZGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CGI.TO.Check ZGD.TO's competition here