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 | $0.36 | -0.83% | 100.4M | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| MS-PF | $25.28 | +0.12% | 231.8B | 3.22 | $7.86 | +2.72% |
| MS-PK | $23.83 | +0.04% | 231.8B | 3.03 | $7.86 | +2.72% |
| MS-PE | $25.42 | -0.04% | 231.6B | 3.24 | $7.86 | +2.72% |
| MS-PA | $21.75 | -0.23% | 231.1B | 2.77 | $7.86 | +2.72% |
| MS-PI | $24.99 | +0.24% | 228.2B | 3.18 | $7.86 | +2.72% |
| GS-PA | $21.73 | -0.14% | 224.2B | 0.42 | $51.53 | +1.69% |
| GS-PD | $20.96 | -0.19% | 223.8B | 0.41 | $51.53 | +1.69% |
| GS-PC | $21.40 | -0.19% | 223.8B | 1.71 | $12.53 | +1.69% |
| MS | $139.09 | -2.37% | 222.2B | 15.75 | $8.83 | +2.72% |
Stock Comparison
CLSKW vs MS-PF Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PF has a market cap of 231.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PF trades at $25.28.
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 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 +0.13%. 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 MS-PK Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PK has a market cap of 231.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PK trades at $23.83.
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 MS-PK's P/E ratio is 3.03. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PK's ROE of +0.13%. 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-PE Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PE has a market cap of 231.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PE trades at $25.42.
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 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 +0.13%. 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 MS-PA Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PA has a market cap of 231.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PA trades at $21.75.
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 MS-PA's P/E ratio is 2.77. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PA's ROE of +0.13%. 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 MS-PI Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PI has a market cap of 228.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PI trades at $24.99.
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 MS-PI's P/E ratio is 3.18. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PI's ROE of +0.13%. 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 GS-PA Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GS-PA has a market cap of 224.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while GS-PA trades at $21.73.
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 GS-PA's P/E ratio is 0.42. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS-PA's ROE of +0.17%. 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 GS-PD Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GS-PD has a market cap of 223.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while GS-PD trades at $20.96.
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 GS-PD's P/E ratio is 0.41. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS-PD's ROE of +0.17%. 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-PC Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GS-PC has a market cap of 223.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while GS-PC trades at $21.40.
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 GS-PC's P/E ratio is 1.71. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS-PC's ROE of +0.17%. 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 MS Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS has a market cap of 222.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS trades at $139.09.
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 MS's P/E ratio is 15.75. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS's ROE of +0.13%. 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 Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GS has a market cap of 217.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while GS trades at $709.57.
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 GS's P/E ratio is 15.64. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GS's ROE of +0.17%. 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 SCHW-PD Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SCHW-PD has a market cap of 178.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SCHW-PD trades at $25.13.
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 SCHW-PD's P/E ratio is 9.06. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SCHW-PD's ROE of +0.16%. 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 SCHW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SCHW has a market cap of 173.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SCHW trades at $95.53.
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 SCHW's P/E ratio is 25.69. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SCHW's ROE of +0.16%. 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 GS-PJ Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GS-PJ has a market cap of 68.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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 +0.17%. 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 GS-PK Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GS-PK has a market cap of 64.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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 +0.17%. 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-PP Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PP has a market cap of 40.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PP trades at $25.51.
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 +0.13%. 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 MS-PQ Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PQ has a market cap of 40.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PQ trades at $25.67.
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 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.Check MS-PQ's competition here
CLSKW vs SCHW-PJ Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SCHW-PJ has a market cap of 35.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SCHW-PJ trades at $19.44.
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 7.02. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SCHW-PJ's ROE of +0.16%. 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 RJF Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, RJF has a market cap of 32.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while RJF trades at $163.03.
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 15.99. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to RJF's ROE of +0.24%. 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 TW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, TW has a market cap of 32.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while TW trades at $137.04.
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 TW's P/E ratio is 52.91. 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.Check TW's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PL Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PL has a market cap of 32B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PL trades at $20.04.
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 MS-PL's P/E ratio is 2.55. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PL's ROE of +0.13%. 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 LPLA Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, LPLA has a market cap of 29.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while LPLA trades at $369.91.
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 25.35. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to LPLA's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to LPLA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check LPLA's competition here
CLSKW vs MS-PO Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MS-PO has a market cap of 27.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MS-PO trades at $17.41.
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 MS-PO's P/E ratio is 2.22. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MS-PO's ROE of +0.13%. 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 IBKR Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, IBKR has a market cap of 27.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while IBKR trades at $63.61.
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 IBKR's P/E ratio is 33.04. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to IBKR's ROE of +0.18%. 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.Check IBKR's competition here
CLSKW vs NMR Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, NMR has a market cap of 19.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while NMR trades at $6.68.
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 NMR's P/E ratio is 8.05. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to NMR's ROE of +0.11%. 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 HLI Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, HLI has a market cap of 13.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while HLI trades at $189.79.
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 HLI's P/E ratio is 32.00. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to HLI's ROE of +0.19%. 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 SF-PB Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SF-PB has a market cap of 11.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SF-PB trades at $24.66.
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 SF-PB's P/E ratio is 3.71. 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.Check SF-PB's competition here
CLSKW vs JEF Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, JEF has a market cap of 11.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while JEF trades at $55.91.
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.Check JEF's competition here
CLSKW vs SF Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SF has a market cap of 11.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SF trades at $111.17.
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 SF's P/E ratio is 21.55. 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.Check SF's competition here
CLSKW vs EVR Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, EVR has a market cap of 11.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while EVR trades at $294.01.
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 EVR's P/E ratio is 26.61. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to EVR's ROE of +0.40%. 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 FRHC Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, FRHC has a market cap of 11.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while FRHC trades at $182.17.
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 FRHC's P/E ratio is 130.12. 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.Check FRHC's competition here
CLSKW vs SCE-PJ Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SCE-PJ has a market cap of 9.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SCE-PJ trades at $23.78.
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 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.Check SCE-PJ's competition here
CLSKW vs XP Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, XP has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while XP trades at $16.36.
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 XP's P/E ratio is 10.55. 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.Check XP's competition here
CLSKW vs MKTX Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MKTX has a market cap of 7.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MKTX trades at $207.75.
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 MKTX's P/E ratio is 36.07. 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.Check MKTX's competition here
CLSKW vs VIRT Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, VIRT has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while VIRT trades at $43.37.
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 9.84. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to VIRT's ROE of +1.07%. 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 MARA Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MARA has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MARA trades at $15.50.
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 MARA's P/E ratio is 8.33. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MARA's ROE of +0.18%. 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.Check MARA's competition here
CLSKW vs PIPR Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, PIPR has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while PIPR trades at $311.59.
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 27.20. 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.Check PIPR's competition here
CLSKW vs RJF-PA Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, RJF-PA has a market cap of 5.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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 +0.24%. 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 RJF-PB Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, RJF-PB has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while RJF-PB trades at $25.24.
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 +0.24%. 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 MC Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MC has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MC trades at $68.58.
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 MC's P/E ratio is 26.79. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to MC's ROE of +0.44%. 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 SNEX Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SNEX has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SNEX trades at $96.96.
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 SNEX's P/E ratio is 16.46. 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.Check SNEX's competition here
CLSKW vs LAZ Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, LAZ has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while LAZ trades at $50.19.
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 17.18. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to LAZ's ROE of +0.48%. 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 BGC Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, BGC has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while BGC trades at $9.48.
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 BGC's P/E ratio is 31.60. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BGC's ROE of +0.17%. 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 PJT Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, PJT has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while PJT trades at $179.02.
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 PJT's P/E ratio is 30.66. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to PJT's ROE of +553.41%. 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 IREN Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, IREN has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while IREN trades at $15.40.
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 IREN's P/E ratio is -49.68. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to IREN's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to IREN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check IREN's competition here
CLSKW vs MRX Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MRX has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MRX trades at $37.89.
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 MRX's P/E ratio is 11.55. 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.Check MRX's competition here
CLSKW vs FUTU Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, FUTU has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while FUTU trades at $141.67.
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 FUTU's P/E ratio is 23.81. 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.Check FUTU's competition here
CLSKW vs SF-PC Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SF-PC has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SF-PC trades at $23.76.
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 SF-PC's P/E ratio is 3.57. 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.Check SF-PC's competition here
CLSKW vs HUT Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, HUT has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while HUT trades at $19.78.
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 HUT's P/E ratio is -29.97. 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.Check HUT's competition here
CLSKW vs PWP Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, PWP has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while PWP 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 PWP's P/E ratio is -99.86. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to PWP's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to PWP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check PWP's competition here
CLSKW vs SF-PD Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SF-PD has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SF-PD trades at $18.07.
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 SF-PD's P/E ratio is 2.72. 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.Check SF-PD's competition here
CLSKW vs WULF Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, WULF has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while WULF trades at $4.76.
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 WULF's P/E ratio is -14.00. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to WULF's ROE of -0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to WULF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check WULF's competition here
CLSKW vs BGCP Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, BGCP has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check BGCP's competition here
CLSKW vs CIFRW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, CIFRW has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while CIFRW trades at $0.94.
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.Check CIFRW's competition here
CLSKW vs CIFR Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, CIFR has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while CIFR 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 CIFR's P/E ratio is -12.97. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to CIFR's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to CIFR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check CIFR's competition here
CLSKW vs TIGR Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, TIGR has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while TIGR trades at $9.40.
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 TIGR's P/E ratio is 20.89. 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.Check TIGR's competition here
CLSKW vs HKIB Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, HKIB has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check HKIB's competition here
CLSKW vs DFIN Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, DFIN has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while DFIN trades at $51.07.
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 DFIN's P/E ratio is 18.06. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to DFIN's ROE of +0.19%. 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.Check DFIN's competition here
CLSKW vs COWN Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, COWN has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check COWN's competition here
CLSKW vs BTBT Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, BTBT has a market cap of 870.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while BTBT trades at $2.72.
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 -4.86. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BTBT's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BTBT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BTBT's competition here
CLSKW vs AC Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, AC has a market cap of 785.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while AC trades at $37.15.
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 AC's P/E ratio is 20.64. 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.Check AC's competition here
CLSKW vs OPY Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, OPY has a market cap of 763.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while OPY trades at $73.28.
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 OPY's P/E ratio is 10.90. 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.Check OPY's competition here
CLSKW vs BITF Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, BITF has a market cap of 646.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while BITF trades at $1.16.
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 BITF's P/E ratio is -6.44. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BITF's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BITF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BITF's competition here
CLSKW vs FUFUW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, FUFUW has a market cap of 558.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while FUFUW 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 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.Check FUFUW's competition here
CLSKW vs FUFU Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, FUFU has a market cap of 546.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while FUFU trades at $3.35.
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 FUFU's P/E ratio is 335.00. 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.Check FUFU's competition here
CLSKW vs AMRK Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, AMRK has a market cap of 506.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while AMRK trades at $20.57.
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 AMRK's P/E ratio is 13.10. 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.Check AMRK's competition here
CLSKW vs HIVE Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, HIVE has a market cap of 435M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while HIVE trades at $2.03.
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 HIVE's P/E ratio is -101.50. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to HIVE's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to HIVE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check HIVE's competition here
CLSKW vs COHN Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, COHN has a market cap of 309.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while COHN trades at $11.43.
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 COHN's P/E ratio is -9.77. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to COHN's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to COHN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check COHN's competition here
CLSKW vs GHL Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GHL has a market cap of 282M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check GHL's competition here
CLSKW vs MFH Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MFH has a market cap of 262.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MFH trades at $4.13.
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 MFH's P/E ratio is -51.56. 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.Check MFH's competition here
CLSKW vs SWIN Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SWIN has a market cap of 227.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SWIN trades at $3.99.
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 SWIN's P/E ratio is -7.53. 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.Check SWIN's competition here
CLSKW vs WHG Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, WHG has a market cap of 160.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while WHG trades at $16.93.
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 WHG's P/E ratio is 428.00. 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.Check WHG's competition here
CLSKW vs SIEB Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SIEB has a market cap of 149.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SIEB trades at $3.70.
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 SIEB's P/E ratio is 8.04. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to SIEB's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to SIEB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check SIEB's competition here
CLSKW vs PROP Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, PROP has a market cap of 130.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while PROP trades at $2.98.
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 -0.57. 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.Check PROP's competition here
CLSKW vs BTM Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, BTM has a market cap of 107.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while BTM trades at $4.64.
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 BTM's P/E ratio is -30.93. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BTM's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BTM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BTM's competition here
CLSKW vs BTCS Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, BTCS has a market cap of 94.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while BTCS trades at $4.06.
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 -2.36. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to BTCS's ROE of -1.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to BTCS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check BTCS's competition here
CLSKW vs TCJH Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, TCJH has a market cap of 89.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check TCJH's competition here
CLSKW vs SRL Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SRL has a market cap of 84.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while SRL trades at $5.73.
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 SRL's P/E ratio is -5.67. 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.Check SRL's competition here
CLSKW vs HGBL Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, HGBL has a market cap of 76.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while HGBL 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 HGBL's P/E ratio is 18.08. 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.Check HGBL's competition here
CLSKW vs GRYP Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GRYP has a market cap of 76.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while GRYP trades at $1.05.
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 -4.37. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GRYP's ROE of +1.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to GRYP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check GRYP's competition here
CLSKW vs GRDI Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GRDI has a market cap of 68.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check GRDI's competition here
CLSKW vs MDBH Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MDBH has a market cap of 42.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MDBH trades at $4.28.
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 MDBH's P/E ratio is 2.99. 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.Check MDBH's competition here
CLSKW vs SDIG Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SDIG has a market cap of 42M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check SDIG's competition here
CLSKW vs TOP Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, TOP has a market cap of 41.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while TOP trades at $1.12.
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 TOP's P/E ratio is -14.00. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to TOP's ROE of -0.08%. 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
CLSKW vs PLUT Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, PLUT has a market cap of 41.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while PLUT trades at $2.70.
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 PLUT's P/E ratio is -54.00. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to PLUT's ROE of -0.10%. 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 GREE Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GREE has a market cap of 23.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while GREE trades at $1.50.
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 GREE's P/E ratio is -0.81. 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.Check GREE's competition here
CLSKW vs ARBK Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, ARBK has a market cap of 21M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while ARBK trades at $0.29.
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 ARBK's P/E ratio is -0.33. 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.Check ARBK's competition here
CLSKW vs SAI Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SAI has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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 more volatile compared to SAI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check SAI's competition here
CLSKW vs NCPL Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, NCPL has a market cap of 15.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while NCPL trades at $3.44.
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 -0.19. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to NCPL's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is more volatile compared to NCPL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check NCPL's competition here
CLSKW vs NCPLW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, NCPLW has a market cap of 15.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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 more volatile compared to NCPLW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check NCPLW's competition here
CLSKW vs MEGL Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MEGL has a market cap of 11M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MEGL trades at $1.39.
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 MEGL's P/E ratio is -11.33. 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.Check MEGL's competition here
CLSKW vs ABTS Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, ABTS has a market cap of 8.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while ABTS trades at $3.61.
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 ABTS's P/E ratio is -9.55. 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.Check ABTS's competition here
CLSKW vs MIGI Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, MIGI has a market cap of 8.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while MIGI trades at $0.42.
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 MIGI's P/E ratio is -0.29. 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.Check MIGI's competition here
CLSKW vs GSIW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GSIW has a market cap of 8.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while GSIW trades at $0.11.
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 GSIW's P/E ratio is -0.23. In terms of profitability, CLSKW's ROE is +0.05%, compared to GSIW's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, CLSKW is less volatile compared to GSIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CLSKW.Check GSIW's competition here
CLSKW vs ATIF Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, ATIF has a market cap of 7.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check ATIF's competition here
CLSKW vs WAI Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, WAI has a market cap of 4M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while WAI trades at $0.37.
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 WAI's P/E ratio is -0.13. 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.Check WAI's competition here
CLSKW vs GRDIW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, GRDIW has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check GRDIW's competition here
CLSKW vs SAITW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, SAITW has a market cap of 964.2K. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check SAITW's competition here
CLSKW vs LGHLW Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, LGHLW has a market cap of 249.1K. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, 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.Check LGHLW's competition here
CLSKW vs LGHL Comparison August 2025
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 100.4M. In comparison, LGHL has a market cap of 244.9K. Regarding current trading prices, CLSKW is priced at $0.36, while LGHL 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 LGHL's P/E ratio is -0.02. 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.Check LGHL's competition here