CleanSpark, Inc.
CleanSpark, Inc. CLSKW Peers
See (CLSKW) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Financial - Capital Markets Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLSKW | $0.48 | +0.99% | 130.6M | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| MS | $141.85 | +0.21% | 229.5B | 16.77 | $8.53 | +2.59% |
| MS-PA | $21.92 | +0.00% | 223.7B | 2.80 | $7.86 | +2.59% |
| MS-PK | $24.10 | +0.37% | 219.1B | 3.08 | $7.86 | +2.59% |
| MS-PI | $25.11 | +0.01% | 217.6B | 3.20 | $7.86 | +2.59% |
| GS | $703.46 | +0.99% | 217.6B | 16.46 | $43.09 | +2.08% |
| MS-PF | $25.31 | -0.05% | 217B | 3.22 | $7.86 | +2.59% |
| MS-PE | $25.47 | -0.04% | 216.6B | 3.24 | $7.86 | +2.59% |
| GS-PA | $21.95 | +0.55% | 212B | 0.43 | $51.53 | +2.08% |
| GS-PD | $21.64 | +0.84% | 211.6B | 0.42 | $51.53 | +2.08% |
Stock Comparison
CLSKW vs MS Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS has a market cap of 229.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS trades at $141.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS's P/E ratio is 16.77. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PA Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PA has a market cap of 223.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PA trades at $21.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PA's P/E ratio is 2.80. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PA's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PK Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PK has a market cap of 219.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PK trades at $24.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PK's P/E ratio is 3.08. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PK's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PI Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PI has a market cap of 217.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PI trades at $25.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PI's P/E ratio is 3.20. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PI's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GS Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GS has a market cap of 217.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GS trades at $703.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GS's P/E ratio is 16.46. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PF Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PF has a market cap of 217B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PF trades at $25.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PF's P/E ratio is 3.22. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PF's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PE Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PE has a market cap of 216.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PE trades at $25.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PE's P/E ratio is 3.24. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PE's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GS-PA Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GS-PA has a market cap of 212B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GS-PA trades at $21.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GS-PA's P/E ratio is 0.43. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS-PA's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GS-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GS-PD Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GS-PD has a market cap of 211.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GS-PD trades at $21.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GS-PD's P/E ratio is 0.42. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS-PD's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GS-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GS-PC Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GS-PC has a market cap of 209.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GS-PC trades at $21.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GS-PC's P/E ratio is 1.75. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS-PC's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GS-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SCHW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SCHW has a market cap of 169B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SCHW trades at $92.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SCHW's P/E ratio is 28.18. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SCHW's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SCHW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SCHW-PD Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SCHW-PD has a market cap of 164.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SCHW-PD trades at $24.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SCHW-PD's P/E ratio is 9.03. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SCHW-PD's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SCHW-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GS-PJ Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GS-PJ has a market cap of 68.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GS-PJ trades at $25.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GS-PJ's P/E ratio is 0.49. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS-PJ's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GS-PJ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GS-PK Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GS-PK has a market cap of 64.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GS-PK trades at $25.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GS-PK's P/E ratio is 0.49. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS-PK's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GS-PK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PQ Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PQ has a market cap of 42B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PQ trades at $26.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PQ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PQ's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PQ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PP Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PP has a market cap of 41.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PP trades at $26.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PP's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SCHW-PJ Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SCHW-PJ has a market cap of 35.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SCHW-PJ trades at $19.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SCHW-PJ's P/E ratio is 7.10. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SCHW-PJ's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SCHW-PJ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PL Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PL has a market cap of 32.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PL trades at $20.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PL's P/E ratio is 2.59. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PL's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs RJF Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, RJF has a market cap of 32.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while RJF trades at $157.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RJF's P/E ratio is 15.43. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to RJF's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to RJF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs TW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, TW has a market cap of 31.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while TW trades at $135.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TW's P/E ratio is 55.37. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to TW's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to TW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs LPLA Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, LPLA has a market cap of 30.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while LPLA trades at $373.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LPLA's P/E ratio is 26.33. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to LPLA's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to LPLA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MS-PO Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MS-PO has a market cap of 28.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MS-PO trades at $17.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MS-PO's P/E ratio is 2.23. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MS-PO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs IBKR Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, IBKR has a market cap of 25.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while IBKR trades at $59.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IBKR's P/E ratio is 31.77. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to IBKR's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to IBKR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs NMR Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, NMR has a market cap of 18.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while NMR trades at $6.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NMR's P/E ratio is 8.32. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to NMR's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to NMR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs HLI Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, HLI has a market cap of 13.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while HLI trades at $188.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HLI's P/E ratio is 32.73. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to HLI's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to HLI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs EVR Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, EVR has a market cap of 11.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while EVR trades at $291.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas EVR's P/E ratio is 28.57. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to EVR's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to EVR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs JEF Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, JEF has a market cap of 11.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while JEF trades at $54.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas JEF's P/E ratio is 21.59. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to JEF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to JEF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SF Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SF has a market cap of 11.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SF trades at $108.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SF's P/E ratio is 20.93. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SF-PB Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SF-PB has a market cap of 11B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SF-PB trades at $24.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SF-PB's P/E ratio is 3.63. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SF-PB's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SF-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs XP Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, XP has a market cap of 9.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while XP trades at $18.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XP's P/E ratio is 11.85. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to XP's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to XP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs FRHC Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, FRHC has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while FRHC trades at $146.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FRHC's P/E ratio is 103.93. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to FRHC's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to FRHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SCE-PJ Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SCE-PJ has a market cap of 8.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SCE-PJ trades at $23.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SCE-PJ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SCE-PJ's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SCE-PJ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MKTX Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MKTX has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MKTX trades at $214.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MKTX's P/E ratio is 37.94. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MKTX's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MKTX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MARA Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MARA has a market cap of 6.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MARA trades at $19.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MARA's P/E ratio is -17.42. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MARA's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MARA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs VIRT Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, VIRT has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while VIRT trades at $43.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VIRT's P/E ratio is 12.73. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to VIRT's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to VIRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs PIPR Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, PIPR has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while PIPR trades at $300.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PIPR's P/E ratio is 26.43. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to PIPR's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to PIPR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs RJF-PA Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, RJF-PA has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while RJF-PA trades at $25.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RJF-PA's P/E ratio is 3.54. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to RJF-PA's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to RJF-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MC Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MC has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MC trades at $69.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MC's P/E ratio is 31.99. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MC's ROE of +0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs RJF-PB Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, RJF-PB has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while RJF-PB trades at $25.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RJF-PB's P/E ratio is 3.57. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to RJF-PB's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to RJF-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs BGC Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, BGC has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while BGC trades at $10.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BGC's P/E ratio is 40.13. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BGC's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BGC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs LAZ Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, LAZ has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while LAZ trades at $52.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LAZ's P/E ratio is 18.00. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to LAZ's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to LAZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SNEX Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SNEX has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SNEX trades at $92.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SNEX's P/E ratio is 16.34. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SNEX's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SNEX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs PJT Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, PJT has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while PJT trades at $175.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PJT's P/E ratio is 31.41. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to PJT's ROE of +0.99%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to PJT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs IREN Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, IREN has a market cap of 4.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while IREN trades at $16.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IREN's P/E ratio is -54.95. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to IREN's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to IREN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MRX Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MRX has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MRX trades at $37.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MRX's P/E ratio is 11.62. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MRX's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MRX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs HUT Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, HUT has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while HUT trades at $22.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HUT's P/E ratio is -33.44. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to HUT's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to HUT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs FUTU Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, FUTU has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while FUTU trades at $149.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FUTU's P/E ratio is 24.11. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to FUTU's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to FUTU. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SF-PC Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SF-PC has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SF-PC trades at $23.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SF-PC's P/E ratio is 3.50. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SF-PC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SF-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs CIFR Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, CIFR has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while CIFR trades at $6.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CIFR's P/E ratio is -16.42. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to CIFR's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to CIFR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs CIFRW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, CIFRW has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while CIFRW trades at $1.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CIFRW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to CIFRW's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to CIFRW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs WULF Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, WULF has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while WULF trades at $4.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas WULF's P/E ratio is -15.10. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to WULF's ROE of -0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to WULF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs PWP Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, PWP has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while PWP trades at $19.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PWP's P/E ratio is -98.86. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to PWP's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to PWP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SF-PD Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SF-PD has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SF-PD trades at $17.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SF-PD's P/E ratio is 2.68. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SF-PD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SF-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs DFIN Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, DFIN has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while DFIN trades at $64.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DFIN's P/E ratio is 21.69. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to DFIN's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to DFIN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs TIGR Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, TIGR has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while TIGR trades at $10.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TIGR's P/E ratio is 22.78. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to TIGR's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to TIGR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs BGCP Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, BGCP has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while BGCP trades at $4.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BGCP's P/E ratio is 40.27. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BGCP's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BGCP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs HKIB Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, HKIB has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while HKIB trades at $3.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HKIB's P/E ratio is 6.68. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to HKIB's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to HKIB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs COWN Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, COWN has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while COWN trades at $38.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas COWN's P/E ratio is 17.64. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to COWN's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to COWN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs AC Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, AC has a market cap of 793.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while AC trades at $37.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AC's P/E ratio is 20.86. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to AC's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to AC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs BTBT Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, BTBT has a market cap of 724.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while BTBT trades at $3.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BTBT's P/E ratio is -6.21. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BTBT's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to BTBT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs OPY Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, OPY has a market cap of 697M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while OPY trades at $66.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas OPY's P/E ratio is 9.95. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to OPY's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to OPY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs BITF Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, BITF has a market cap of 597.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while BITF trades at $1.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BITF's P/E ratio is -5.97. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BITF's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to BITF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs AMRK Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, AMRK has a market cap of 588.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while AMRK trades at $23.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AMRK's P/E ratio is 15.22. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to AMRK's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to AMRK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs FUFU Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, FUFU has a market cap of 578.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while FUFU trades at $3.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FUFU's P/E ratio is 354.70. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to FUFU's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to FUFU. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs FUFUW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, FUFUW has a market cap of 577.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while FUFUW trades at $0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FUFUW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to FUFUW's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to FUFUW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs HIVE Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, HIVE has a market cap of 468.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while HIVE trades at $2.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HIVE's P/E ratio is -116.50. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to HIVE's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to HIVE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs BTM Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, BTM has a market cap of 363.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while BTM trades at $5.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BTM's P/E ratio is -37.67. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BTM's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to BTM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MFH Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MFH has a market cap of 289.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MFH trades at $4.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MFH's P/E ratio is -56.87. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MFH's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to MFH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GHL Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GHL has a market cap of 282M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GHL trades at $14.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GHL's P/E ratio is -10.27. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GHL's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GHL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs COHN Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, COHN has a market cap of 277.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while COHN trades at $10.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas COHN's P/E ratio is -8.76. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to COHN's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to COHN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SWIN Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SWIN has a market cap of 165.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SWIN trades at $3.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SWIN's P/E ratio is -4.07. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SWIN's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to SWIN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs PROP Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, PROP has a market cap of 160.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while PROP trades at $3.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PROP's P/E ratio is -0.69. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to PROP's ROE of -0.87%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to PROP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SIEB Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SIEB has a market cap of 159.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SIEB trades at $3.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SIEB's P/E ratio is 8.57. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SIEB's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SIEB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs WHG Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, WHG has a market cap of 156.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while WHG trades at $16.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas WHG's P/E ratio is 416.00. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to WHG's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to WHG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GRYP Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GRYP has a market cap of 107.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GRYP trades at $1.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GRYP's P/E ratio is -6.17. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GRYP's ROE of +1.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to GRYP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SRL Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SRL has a market cap of 93.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SRL trades at $5.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SRL's P/E ratio is -6.17. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SRL's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SRL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs BTCS Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, BTCS has a market cap of 90.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while BTCS trades at $4.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BTCS's P/E ratio is -2.49. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BTCS's ROE of -1.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to BTCS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs TCJH Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, TCJH has a market cap of 89.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while TCJH trades at $0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TCJH's P/E ratio is -1.61. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to TCJH's ROE of -0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to TCJH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs HGBL Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, HGBL has a market cap of 81.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while HGBL trades at $2.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HGBL's P/E ratio is 19.33. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to HGBL's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to HGBL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GRDI Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GRDI has a market cap of 68.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GRDI trades at $0.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GRDI's P/E ratio is 3.20. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GRDI's ROE of -2.49%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to GRDI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs PLUT Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, PLUT has a market cap of 48.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while PLUT trades at $3.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PLUT's P/E ratio is -63.64. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to PLUT's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to PLUT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MDBH Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MDBH has a market cap of 48.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MDBH trades at $4.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MDBH's P/E ratio is 3.43. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MDBH's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MDBH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs TOP Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, TOP has a market cap of 48.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while TOP trades at $1.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TOP's P/E ratio is -16.25. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to TOP's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to TOP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SDIG Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SDIG has a market cap of 42M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SDIG trades at $2.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SDIG's P/E ratio is -3.51. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SDIG's ROE of -0.96%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SDIG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GSIW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GSIW has a market cap of 38.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GSIW trades at $1.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GSIW's P/E ratio is -3.24. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GSIW's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GSIW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GREE Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GREE has a market cap of 28.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GREE trades at $1.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GREE's P/E ratio is -0.98. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GREE's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to GREE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs NCPLW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, NCPLW has a market cap of 25.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while NCPLW trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NCPLW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to NCPLW's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to NCPLW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs ARBK Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, ARBK has a market cap of 19.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while ARBK trades at $0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ARBK's P/E ratio is -0.31. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to ARBK's ROE of +3.56%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to ARBK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SAI Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SAI has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SAI trades at $0.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SAI's P/E ratio is -2.88. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SAI's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to SAI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs NCPL Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, NCPL has a market cap of 15.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while NCPL trades at $6.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NCPL's P/E ratio is -0.38. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to NCPL's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to NCPL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MIGI Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MIGI has a market cap of 11.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MIGI trades at $0.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MIGI's P/E ratio is -0.41. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MIGI's ROE of +58.60%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to MIGI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs ABTS Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, ABTS has a market cap of 10.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while ABTS trades at $5.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ABTS's P/E ratio is -12.08. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to ABTS's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to ABTS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs ATIF Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, ATIF has a market cap of 7.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while ATIF trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ATIF's P/E ratio is -2.06. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to ATIF's ROE of -0.77%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to ATIF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs MEGL Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, MEGL has a market cap of 6.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while MEGL trades at $1.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MEGL's P/E ratio is -13.33. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MEGL's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MEGL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs WAI Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, WAI has a market cap of 5.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while WAI trades at $0.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas WAI's P/E ratio is -0.18. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to WAI's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to WAI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs LGHLW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, LGHLW has a market cap of 2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while LGHLW trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LGHLW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to LGHLW's ROE of -1.53%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to LGHLW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs GRDIW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, GRDIW has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while GRDIW trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GRDIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GRDIW's ROE of -2.49%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to GRDIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs SAITW Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, SAITW has a market cap of 964.2K. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while SAITW trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SAITW's P/E ratio is -6.77. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SAITW's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SAITW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.
CLSKW vs LGHL Comparison
CLSKW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CLSKW stands at 130.6M. In comparison, LGHL has a market cap of 366.9K. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.48, while LGHL trades at $3.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CLSKW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LGHL's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to LGHL's ROE of -1.53%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to LGHL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.