CleanSpark, Inc.
CleanSpark, Inc. (CLSKW) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
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 | $0.35 | +0.00% | 90.1M | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| GS | $916.65 | +0.00% | 279.2B | 17.96 | $51.36 | +1.52% |
| MS | $174.37 | +0.00% | 278.8B | 17.18 | $10.21 | +2.25% |
| GS-PD | $20.16 | +0.00% | 214.5B | 0.39 | $51.53 | +1.52% |
| GS-PA | $20.26 | +0.00% | 209.3B | 0.39 | $51.53 | +1.52% |
| SCHW | $93.87 | +0.00% | 170.6B | 20.21 | $4.65 | +1.21% |
| MS-PA | $20.08 | +0.01% | 70.7B | 2.55 | $7.86 | +2.25% |
| GS-PJ | $25.20 | -0.03% | 68.9B | 0.49 | $51.53 | +1.52% |
| HOOD | $75.65 | +0.00% | 68.6B | 37.13 | $2.05 | N/A |
| MS-PK | $24.90 | +0.00% | 67.8B | 3.17 | $7.86 | +2.25% |
Stock Comparison
CLSKW vs GS Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GS has a market cap of 279.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while GS trades at $916.65.
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 17.96. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GS's ROE of +0.14%. 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.Check GS's competition here
CLSKW vs MS Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS has a market cap of 278.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MS trades at $174.37.
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 17.18. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MS's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS's competition here
CLSKW vs GS-PD Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GS-PD has a market cap of 214.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while GS-PD trades at $20.16.
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 GS-PD's P/E ratio is 0.39. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GS-PD's ROE of +0.14%. 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.Check GS-PD's competition here
CLSKW vs GS-PA Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GS-PA has a market cap of 209.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while GS-PA trades at $20.26.
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 0.39. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GS-PA's ROE of +0.14%. 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.Check GS-PA's competition here
CLSKW vs SCHW Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SCHW has a market cap of 170.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SCHW trades at $93.87.
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 20.21. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SCHW's ROE of +0.23%. 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.Check SCHW's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PA Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PA has a market cap of 70.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MS-PA trades at $20.08.
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 MS-PA's P/E ratio is 2.55. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MS-PA's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PA's competition here
CLSKW vs GS-PJ Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GS-PJ has a market cap of 68.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, compared to GS-PJ's ROE of +0.14%. 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.Check GS-PJ's competition here
CLSKW vs HOOD Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, HOOD has a market cap of 68.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while HOOD trades at $75.65.
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 HOOD's P/E ratio is 37.13. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to HOOD's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to HOOD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check HOOD's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PK Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PK has a market cap of 67.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MS-PK trades at $24.90.
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 MS-PK's P/E ratio is 3.17. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MS-PK's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PK's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PI Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PI has a market cap of 67.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MS-PI trades at $25.23.
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 MS-PI's P/E ratio is 3.21. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MS-PI's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PI's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PF Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PF has a market cap of 65.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, compared to MS-PF's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PF's competition here
CLSKW vs GS-PK Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GS-PK has a market cap of 64.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, compared to GS-PK's ROE of +0.14%. 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.Check GS-PK's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PE Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PE has a market cap of 64.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, compared to MS-PE's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PE's competition here
CLSKW vs SCHW-PD Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SCHW-PD has a market cap of 50.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SCHW-PD trades at $25.17.
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 9.08. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SCHW-PD's ROE of +0.23%. 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.Check SCHW-PD's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PQ Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PQ has a market cap of 41.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MS-PQ trades at $26.33.
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 MS-PQ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MS-PQ's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PQ's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PP Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PP has a market cap of 40.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MS-PP trades at $25.73.
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 MS-PP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MS-PP's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PP's competition here
CLSKW vs SCHW-PJ Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SCHW-PJ has a market cap of 34B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SCHW-PJ trades at $18.89.
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 6.81. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SCHW-PJ's ROE of +0.23%. 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.Check SCHW-PJ's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PL Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PL has a market cap of 33.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MS-PL trades at $20.97.
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 2.67. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MS-PL's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PL's competition here
CLSKW vs RJF Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, RJF has a market cap of 31.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while RJF trades at $158.03.
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 RJF's P/E ratio is 15.48. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to RJF's ROE of +0.17%. 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.Check RJF's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PO Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MS-PO has a market cap of 28.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MS-PO trades at $18.03.
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 MS-PO's P/E ratio is 2.29. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MS-PO's ROE of +0.15%. 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.Check MS-PO's competition here
CLSKW vs NMR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, NMR has a market cap of 27.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while NMR trades at $9.39.
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 11.99. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, 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.Check NMR's competition here
CLSKW vs LPLA Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, LPLA has a market cap of 25.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while LPLA trades at $327.92.
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 LPLA's P/E ratio is 29.23. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to LPLA's ROE of +0.19%. 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.Check LPLA's competition here
CLSKW vs TW Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, TW has a market cap of 25.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while TW trades at $118.95.
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 TW's P/E ratio is 31.61. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TW's ROE of +0.13%. 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.Check TW's competition here
CLSKW vs FUTU Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, FUTU has a market cap of 21.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while FUTU trades at $153.50.
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 FUTU's P/E ratio is 17.44. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to FUTU's ROE of +0.31%. 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.Check FUTU's competition here
CLSKW vs STRD Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, STRD has a market cap of 21.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while STRD trades at $76.42.
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 STRD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to STRD's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to STRD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check STRD's competition here
CLSKW vs CRCL Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, CRCL has a market cap of 16B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while CRCL trades at $61.92.
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 CRCL's P/E ratio is -73.31. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to CRCL's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to CRCL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check CRCL's competition here
CLSKW vs IREN Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, IREN has a market cap of 13.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while IREN trades at $43.29.
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 27.78. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to IREN's ROE of +0.19%. 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.Check IREN's competition here
CLSKW vs EVR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, EVR has a market cap of 12.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while EVR trades at $326.87.
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 23.38. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to EVR's ROE of +0.34%. 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.Check EVR's competition here
CLSKW vs SF Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SF has a market cap of 12.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SF trades at $119.42.
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 20.43. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SF's ROE of +0.12%. 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.Check SF's competition here
CLSKW vs XP Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, XP has a market cap of 12.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while XP trades at $21.48.
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 XP's P/E ratio is 12.34. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to XP's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to XP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check XP's competition here
CLSKW vs HLI Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, HLI has a market cap of 11.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while HLI trades at $166.12.
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 HLI's P/E ratio is 25.78. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, 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.Check HLI's competition here
CLSKW vs JEF Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, JEF has a market cap of 11B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while JEF trades at $53.15.
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 18.74. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to JEF's ROE of +0.07%. 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.Check JEF's competition here
CLSKW vs SCE-PJ Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SCE-PJ has a market cap of 9.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SCE-PJ trades at $25.00.
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 SCE-PJ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SCE-PJ's ROE of +0.16%. 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.Check SCE-PJ's competition here
CLSKW vs GS-PC Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GS-PC has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while GS-PC trades at $20.45.
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 GS-PC's P/E ratio is 1.64. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GS-PC's ROE of +0.14%. 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.Check GS-PC's competition here
CLSKW vs FRHC Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, FRHC has a market cap of 7.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while FRHC trades at $112.03.
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 FRHC's P/E ratio is 5982.50. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to FRHC's ROE of +0.00%. 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.Check FRHC's competition here
CLSKW vs GLXY Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GLXY has a market cap of 7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while GLXY trades at $21.63.
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 GLXY's P/E ratio is -13.95. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GLXY's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GLXY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check GLXY's competition here
CLSKW vs MKTX Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MKTX has a market cap of 6.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MKTX trades at $180.70.
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 26.61. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MKTX's ROE of +0.19%. 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.Check MKTX's competition here
CLSKW vs SNEX Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SNEX has a market cap of 6.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SNEX trades at $124.87.
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 19.23. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SNEX's ROE of +0.16%. 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.Check SNEX's competition here
CLSKW vs WULF Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, WULF has a market cap of 6.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while WULF trades at $15.47.
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 WULF's P/E ratio is -10.35. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to WULF's ROE of -2.70%. 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.Check WULF's competition here
CLSKW vs VIRT Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, VIRT has a market cap of 5.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while VIRT trades at $39.37.
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 7.76. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to VIRT's ROE of +0.30%. 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.Check VIRT's competition here
CLSKW vs RIOT Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, RIOT has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while RIOT trades at $16.22.
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 RIOT's P/E ratio is 30.15. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to RIOT's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to RIOT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check RIOT's competition here
CLSKW vs HUT Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, HUT has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while HUT trades at $54.86.
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 HUT's P/E ratio is 27.74. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to HUT's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to HUT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check HUT's competition here
CLSKW vs PIPR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, PIPR has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while PIPR trades at $327.20.
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 PIPR's P/E ratio is 20.70. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to PIPR's ROE of +0.23%. 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.Check PIPR's competition here
CLSKW vs CIFR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, CIFR has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while CIFR trades at $15.80.
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 -86.18. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to CIFR's ROE of -0.10%. 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.Check CIFR's competition here
CLSKW vs RJF-PA Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, RJF-PA has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, compared to RJF-PA's ROE of +0.17%. 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.Check RJF-PA's competition here
CLSKW vs FIGR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, FIGR has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while FIGR trades at $32.93.
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 FIGR's P/E ratio is 112.00. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to FIGR's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to FIGR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check FIGR's competition here
CLSKW vs LAZ Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, LAZ has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while LAZ trades at $51.09.
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 LAZ's P/E ratio is 23.65. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to LAZ's ROE of +0.31%. 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.Check LAZ's competition here
CLSKW vs MC Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MC has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MC trades at $62.73.
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 MC's P/E ratio is 21.47. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MC's ROE of +0.43%. 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.Check MC's competition here
CLSKW vs BGC Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BGC has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BGC trades at $9.71.
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 BGC's P/E ratio is 29.09. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BGC's ROE of +0.16%. 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.Check BGC's competition here
CLSKW vs SF-PB Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SF-PB has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SF-PB trades at $24.30.
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 SF-PB's P/E ratio is 3.67. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SF-PB's ROE of +0.12%. 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.Check SF-PB's competition here
CLSKW vs PJT Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, PJT has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while PJT trades at $152.79.
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 PJT's P/E ratio is 22.70. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to PJT's ROE of +0.49%. 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.Check PJT's competition here
CLSKW vs BMNR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BMNR has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BMNR trades at $19.96.
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 BMNR's P/E ratio is -21.65. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BMNR's ROE of -0.97%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BMNR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BMNR's competition here
CLSKW vs MIAX Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MIAX has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MIAX trades at $40.64.
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 MIAX's P/E ratio is -21.80. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MIAX's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to MIAX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check MIAX's competition here
CLSKW vs MARA Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MARA has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MARA trades at $7.96.
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 MARA's P/E ratio is 3.10. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MARA's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to MARA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check MARA's competition here
CLSKW vs MRX Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MRX has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MRX trades at $41.97.
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 12.08. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MRX's ROE of +0.18%. 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.Check MRX's competition here
CLSKW vs ETOR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, ETOR has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while ETOR trades at $31.00.
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 ETOR's P/E ratio is 13.05. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to ETOR's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to ETOR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check ETOR's competition here
CLSKW vs SF-PC Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SF-PC has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SF-PC trades at $24.16.
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-PC's P/E ratio is 3.65. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SF-PC's ROE of +0.12%. 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.Check SF-PC's competition here
CLSKW vs PWP Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, PWP has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while PWP trades at $20.38.
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 PWP's P/E ratio is 42.81. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to PWP's ROE of -0.10%. 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.Check PWP's competition here
CLSKW vs SF-PD Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SF-PD has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SF-PD trades at $17.62.
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 SF-PD's P/E ratio is 2.65. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SF-PD's ROE of +0.12%. 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.Check SF-PD's competition here
CLSKW vs BGCP Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BGCP has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, compared to BGCP's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to BGCP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BGCP's competition here
CLSKW vs CIFRW Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, CIFRW has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while CIFRW trades at $4.09.
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 CIFRW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to CIFRW's ROE of -0.10%. 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.Check CIFRW's competition here
CLSKW vs HKIB Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, HKIB has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, 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.Check HKIB's competition here
CLSKW vs GOLD Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GOLD has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while GOLD trades at $58.67.
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 GOLD's P/E ratio is 122.59. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GOLD's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GOLD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check GOLD's competition here
CLSKW vs TIGR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, TIGR has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while TIGR trades at $8.07.
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 9.73. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TIGR's ROE of +0.21%. 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.Check TIGR's competition here
CLSKW vs AMRK Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, AMRK has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while AMRK trades at $57.77.
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 AMRK's P/E ratio is 192.57. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to AMRK's ROE of +0.02%. 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.Check AMRK's competition here
CLSKW vs DFIN Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, DFIN has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while DFIN trades at $48.53.
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 DFIN's P/E ratio is 43.11. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to DFIN's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to DFIN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check DFIN's competition here
CLSKW vs BITF Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BITF has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BITF trades at $2.08.
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 BITF's P/E ratio is -15.62. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BITF's ROE of -0.20%. 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.Check BITF's competition here
CLSKW vs COWN Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, COWN has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, 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.Check COWN's competition here
CLSKW vs ABTC Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, ABTC has a market cap of 927.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while ABTC trades at $1.02.
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 ABTC's P/E ratio is 5.56. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to ABTC's ROE of -0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to ABTC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check ABTC's competition here
CLSKW vs OPY Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, OPY has a market cap of 923M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while OPY trades at $87.64.
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 OPY's P/E ratio is 6.79. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to OPY's ROE of +0.16%. 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.Check OPY's competition here
CLSKW vs GEMI Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GEMI has a market cap of 684.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while GEMI trades at $6.00.
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 GEMI's P/E ratio is -1.46. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GEMI's ROE of +2.96%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to GEMI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check GEMI's competition here
CLSKW vs AC Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, AC has a market cap of 652.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while AC trades at $30.92.
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 AC's P/E ratio is 12.17. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to AC's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to AC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check AC's competition here
CLSKW vs BTBT Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BTBT has a market cap of 530.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BTBT trades at $1.68.
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 BTBT's P/E ratio is 2.48. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BTBT's ROE of +0.23%. 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.Check BTBT's competition here
CLSKW vs BASG Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BASG has a market cap of 487.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BASG trades at $23.68.
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 BASG's P/E ratio is 33.50. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BASG's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BASG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BASG's competition here
CLSKW vs BTGO Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BTGO has a market cap of 447M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BTGO trades at $10.60.
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 BTGO's P/E ratio is 7.40. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BTGO's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BTGO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BTGO's competition here
CLSKW vs RJF-PB Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, RJF-PB has a market cap of 423.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while RJF-PB trades at $2.17.
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 0.30. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to RJF-PB's ROE of +0.17%. 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.Check RJF-PB's competition here
CLSKW vs MFH Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, MFH has a market cap of 390.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while MFH trades at $5.65.
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 -70.63. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MFH's ROE of -0.22%. 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.Check MFH's competition here
CLSKW vs FUFU Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, FUFU has a market cap of 375.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while FUFU trades at $2.17.
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 5.85. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to FUFU's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to FUFU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check FUFU's competition here
CLSKW vs GHL Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GHL has a market cap of 282M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, 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.Check GHL's competition here
CLSKW vs DEFT Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, DEFT has a market cap of 218.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while DEFT trades at $0.69.
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 DEFT's P/E ratio is 67.01. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to DEFT's ROE of -1.28%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to DEFT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check DEFT's competition here
CLSKW vs BASV Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BASV has a market cap of 202.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BASV trades at $28.62.
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 BASV's P/E ratio is 19.90. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BASV's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BASV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BASV's competition here
CLSKW vs BRR Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BRR has a market cap of 196M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BRR trades at $2.27.
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 BRR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BRR's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BRR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BRR's competition here
CLSKW vs SWIN Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SWIN has a market cap of 160.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SWIN trades at $3.28.
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 SWIN's P/E ratio is -6.19. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SWIN's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to SWIN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check SWIN's competition here
CLSKW vs AXG Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, AXG has a market cap of 157M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while AXG trades at $3.78.
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 AXG's P/E ratio is -18.05. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to AXG's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to AXG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check AXG's competition here
CLSKW vs WHG Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, WHG has a market cap of 155.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while WHG trades at $16.95.
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 WHG's P/E ratio is 20.90. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to WHG's ROE of +0.06%. 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.Check WHG's competition here
CLSKW vs SRL Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SRL has a market cap of 140.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SRL trades at $9.32.
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 SRL's P/E ratio is -66.11. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SRL's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to SRL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check SRL's competition here
CLSKW vs SUIG Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SUIG has a market cap of 100.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SUIG trades at $1.20.
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 SUIG's P/E ratio is -0.68. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SUIG's ROE of -0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to SUIG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check SUIG's competition here
CLSKW vs PROP Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, PROP has a market cap of 94.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while PROP trades at $1.96.
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 PROP's P/E ratio is -0.90. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to PROP's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to PROP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check PROP's competition here
CLSKW vs TCJH Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, TCJH has a market cap of 89.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, 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.Check TCJH's competition here
CLSKW vs SIEB Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SIEB has a market cap of 88.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while SIEB trades at $2.34.
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 12.22. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SIEB's ROE of +0.08%. 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.Check SIEB's competition here
CLSKW vs BTCS Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, BTCS has a market cap of 74.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while BTCS trades at $1.55.
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 0.98. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BTCS's ROE of +0.70%. 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.Check BTCS's competition here
CLSKW vs TSLW Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, TSLW has a market cap of 68.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while TSLW trades at $28.00.
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 TSLW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TSLW's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to TSLW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check TSLW's competition here
CLSKW vs GRDI Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, GRDI has a market cap of 68.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, compared to GRDI's ROE of +0.25%. 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.Check GRDI's competition here
CLSKW vs NVDW Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, NVDW has a market cap of 61.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while NVDW trades at $39.48.
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 NVDW's P/E ratio is 82.95. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to NVDW's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to NVDW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check NVDW's competition here
CLSKW vs DOMH Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, DOMH has a market cap of 56.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while DOMH trades at $3.54.
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 DOMH's P/E ratio is 0.43. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to DOMH's ROE of +1.16%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to DOMH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check DOMH's competition here
CLSKW vs PLUT Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, PLUT has a market cap of 49.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while PLUT trades at $3.16.
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 PLUT's P/E ratio is -17.94. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to PLUT's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to PLUT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check PLUT's competition here
CLSKW vs HGBL Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, HGBL has a market cap of 45.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while HGBL trades at $1.36.
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 16.38. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to HGBL's ROE of +0.05%. 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.Check HGBL's competition here
CLSKW vs SDIG Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, SDIG has a market cap of 42M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, 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 -0.14%, compared to SDIG's ROE of -0.90%. 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.Check SDIG's competition here
CLSKW vs TOP Comparison February 2026
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 90.1M. In comparison, TOP has a market cap of 37.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.35, while TOP trades at $1.02.
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 TOP's P/E ratio is -7.29. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TOP's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to TOP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check TOP's competition here