Collective Mining Ltd.
Collective Mining Ltd. (CNL.TO) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (CNL.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Gold Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNL.TO | CA$27.93 | -0.64% | 2.6B | -35.50 | -CA$0.80 | N/A |
| AEM.TO | CA$281.81 | -6.47% | 148B | 24.28 | CA$12.17 | +0.40% |
| NGT.TO | CA$116.00 | -1.06% | 127.4B | 15.20 | CA$7.63 | +0.59% |
| ABX.TO | CA$55.98 | -5.68% | 98.3B | 14.46 | CA$4.06 | +1.40% |
| WPM.TO | CA$195.95 | -6.11% | 92.5B | 45.57 | CA$4.47 | +0.47% |
| FNV.TO | CA$340.79 | -5.21% | 67.9B | 44.33 | CA$7.94 | +0.32% |
| K.TO | CA$44.38 | -7.31% | 56.7B | 17.48 | CA$2.71 | +0.39% |
| 0ABX.L | CA$29.58 | +1.34% | 50.9B | 16.34 | CA$1.81 | +2.77% |
| AGI.TO | CA$62.61 | -7.41% | 28.1B | 22.99 | CA$2.91 | +0.13% |
| LUG.TO | CA$107.36 | -8.58% | 27.8B | 25.60 | CA$4.50 | +4.32% |
Stock Comparison
CNL.TO vs AEM.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, AEM.TO has a market cap of 148B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while AEM.TO trades at CA$281.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas AEM.TO's P/E ratio is 24.28. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to AEM.TO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to AEM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check AEM.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs NGT.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, NGT.TO has a market cap of 127.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while NGT.TO trades at CA$116.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas NGT.TO's P/E ratio is 15.20. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to NGT.TO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to NGT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check NGT.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs ABX.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ABX.TO has a market cap of 98.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ABX.TO trades at CA$55.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ABX.TO's P/E ratio is 14.46. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ABX.TO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ABX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ABX.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs WPM.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, WPM.TO has a market cap of 92.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while WPM.TO trades at CA$195.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas WPM.TO's P/E ratio is 45.57. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to WPM.TO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to WPM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check WPM.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs FNV.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, FNV.TO has a market cap of 67.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while FNV.TO trades at CA$340.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas FNV.TO's P/E ratio is 44.33. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to FNV.TO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO and FNV.TO have similar daily volatility (4.05).Check FNV.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs K.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, K.TO has a market cap of 56.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while K.TO trades at CA$44.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas K.TO's P/E ratio is 17.48. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to K.TO's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to K.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check K.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs 0ABX.L Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, 0ABX.L has a market cap of 50.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while 0ABX.L trades at CA$29.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas 0ABX.L's P/E ratio is 16.34. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to 0ABX.L's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to 0ABX.L. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check 0ABX.L's competition here
CNL.TO vs AGI.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, AGI.TO has a market cap of 28.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while AGI.TO trades at CA$62.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas AGI.TO's P/E ratio is 22.99. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to AGI.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to AGI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check AGI.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs LUG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, LUG.TO has a market cap of 27.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while LUG.TO trades at CA$107.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas LUG.TO's P/E ratio is 25.60. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to LUG.TO's ROE of +0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to LUG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check LUG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs EDV.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, EDV.TO has a market cap of 22.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while EDV.TO trades at CA$86.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas EDV.TO's P/E ratio is 24.11. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to EDV.TO's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to EDV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check EDV.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs NCM.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, NCM.TO has a market cap of 18.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while NCM.TO trades at CA$20.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas NCM.TO's P/E ratio is 17.21. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to NCM.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to NCM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check NCM.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs EQX.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, EQX.TO has a market cap of 16.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while EQX.TO trades at CA$19.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas EQX.TO's P/E ratio is -526.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to EQX.TO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to EQX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check EQX.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs IMG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, IMG.TO has a market cap of 14.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while IMG.TO trades at CA$23.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas IMG.TO's P/E ratio is 16.07. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to IMG.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to IMG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check IMG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs OR.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, OR.TO has a market cap of 11B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while OR.TO trades at CA$55.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas OR.TO's P/E ratio is 38.18. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to OR.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to OR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check OR.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs OGC.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, OGC.TO has a market cap of 10.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while OGC.TO trades at CA$46.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas OGC.TO's P/E ratio is 12.50. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to OGC.TO's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to OGC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check OGC.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs DPM.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, DPM.TO has a market cap of 9.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while DPM.TO trades at CA$50.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas DPM.TO's P/E ratio is 19.27. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to DPM.TO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to DPM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check DPM.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs NGD.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, NGD.TO has a market cap of 9.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while NGD.TO trades at CA$12.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas NGD.TO's P/E ratio is 8.22. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to NGD.TO's ROE of +0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to NGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check NGD.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs ELD.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ELD.TO has a market cap of 9.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ELD.TO trades at CA$43.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ELD.TO's P/E ratio is 13.15. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ELD.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ELD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ELD.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs BTO.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, BTO.TO has a market cap of 9.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while BTO.TO trades at CA$6.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas BTO.TO's P/E ratio is 17.33. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to BTO.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to BTO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check BTO.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SSRM.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SSRM.TO has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SSRM.TO trades at CA$41.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SSRM.TO's P/E ratio is 17.17. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SSRM.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to SSRM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SSRM.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs YRI.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, YRI.TO has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while YRI.TO trades at CA$7.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas YRI.TO's P/E ratio is -5.72. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to YRI.TO's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to YRI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check YRI.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs OLA.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, OLA.TO has a market cap of 7.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while OLA.TO trades at CA$20.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas OLA.TO's P/E ratio is 53.78. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to OLA.TO's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to OLA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check OLA.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs PRU.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, PRU.TO has a market cap of 7.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while PRU.TO trades at CA$5.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas PRU.TO's P/E ratio is 15.42. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to PRU.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to PRU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check PRU.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs KNT.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, KNT.TO has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while KNT.TO trades at CA$26.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas KNT.TO's P/E ratio is 17.02. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to KNT.TO's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to KNT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check KNT.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs NG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, NG.TO has a market cap of 6.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while NG.TO trades at CA$13.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas NG.TO's P/E ratio is -40.81. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to NG.TO's ROE of -0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to NG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check NG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs TXG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, TXG.TO has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while TXG.TO trades at CA$62.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas TXG.TO's P/E ratio is 10.41. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to TXG.TO's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to TXG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check TXG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs MAU.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, MAU.TO has a market cap of 5.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while MAU.TO trades at CA$15.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas MAU.TO's P/E ratio is -85.16. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to MAU.TO's ROE of -0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to MAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check MAU.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs WGX.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, WGX.TO has a market cap of 5.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while WGX.TO trades at CA$6.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas WGX.TO's P/E ratio is 23.96. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to WGX.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to WGX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check WGX.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs AAUC.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, AAUC.TO has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while AAUC.TO trades at CA$43.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas AAUC.TO's P/E ratio is -70.34. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to AAUC.TO's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to AAUC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check AAUC.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs CG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, CG.TO has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while CG.TO trades at CA$25.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas CG.TO's P/E ratio is 6.97. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to CG.TO's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to CG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check CG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SEA.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SEA.TO has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SEA.TO trades at CA$42.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SEA.TO's P/E ratio is -85.21. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SEA.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to SEA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SEA.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SSL.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SSL.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SSL.TO trades at CA$16.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SSL.TO's P/E ratio is 95.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SSL.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to SSL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SSL.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs WDO.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, WDO.TO has a market cap of 4.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while WDO.TO trades at CA$27.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas WDO.TO's P/E ratio is 12.64. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to WDO.TO's ROE of +0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to WDO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check WDO.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs ORA.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ORA.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ORA.TO trades at CA$45.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ORA.TO's P/E ratio is -40.32. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ORA.TO's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ORA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ORA.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs GTWO.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, GTWO.TO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while GTWO.TO trades at CA$11.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas GTWO.TO's P/E ratio is -244.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to GTWO.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to GTWO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check GTWO.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs CEE.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, CEE.TO has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while CEE.TO trades at CA$2.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas CEE.TO's P/E ratio is 24.80. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to CEE.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to CEE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check CEE.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SXGC.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SXGC.TO has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SXGC.TO trades at CA$10.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SXGC.TO's P/E ratio is -560.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SXGC.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to SXGC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SXGC.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SGD.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SGD.TO has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SGD.TO trades at CA$15.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SGD.TO's P/E ratio is -49.97. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SGD.TO's ROE of -0.64%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to SGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SGD.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs RUP.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, RUP.TO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while RUP.TO trades at CA$11.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas RUP.TO's P/E ratio is -297.50. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to RUP.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to RUP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check RUP.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs CXB.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, CXB.TO has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while CXB.TO trades at CA$2.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas CXB.TO's P/E ratio is 29.90. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to CXB.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to CXB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check CXB.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs ALK.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ALK.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ALK.TO trades at CA$1.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ALK.TO's P/E ratio is 21.63. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ALK.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ALK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ALK.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs IAU.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, IAU.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while IAU.TO trades at CA$2.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas IAU.TO's P/E ratio is -5.71. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to IAU.TO's ROE of -0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to IAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check IAU.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs OSK.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, OSK.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while OSK.TO trades at CA$4.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas OSK.TO's P/E ratio is -489.50. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to OSK.TO's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to OSK.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check OSK.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs MSA.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, MSA.TO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while MSA.TO trades at CA$5.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas MSA.TO's P/E ratio is 7.80. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to MSA.TO's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to MSA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check MSA.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs ORE.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ORE.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ORE.TO trades at CA$2.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ORE.TO's P/E ratio is 16.13. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ORE.TO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ORE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ORE.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs RIO.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, RIO.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while RIO.TO trades at CA$2.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas RIO.TO's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to RIO.TO's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to RIO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check RIO.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SBB.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SBB.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SBB.TO trades at CA$2.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SBB.TO's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SBB.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to SBB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SBB.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs KRR.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, KRR.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while KRR.TO trades at CA$6.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas KRR.TO's P/E ratio is 83.75. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to KRR.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to KRR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check KRR.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs GAU.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, GAU.TO has a market cap of 934.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while GAU.TO trades at CA$3.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas GAU.TO's P/E ratio is -23.87. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to GAU.TO's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to GAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check GAU.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs LGD.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, LGD.TO has a market cap of 902.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while LGD.TO trades at CA$1.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas LGD.TO's P/E ratio is -24.57. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to LGD.TO's ROE of -0.77%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to LGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check LGD.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs AUXX.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, AUXX.V has a market cap of 800.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while AUXX.V trades at CA$1.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas AUXX.V's P/E ratio is -81.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to AUXX.V's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to AUXX.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check AUXX.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs PRB.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, PRB.TO has a market cap of 742.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while PRB.TO trades at CA$3.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas PRB.TO's P/E ratio is -30.33. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to PRB.TO's ROE of -0.87%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to PRB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check PRB.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs ITH.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ITH.TO has a market cap of 726.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ITH.TO trades at CA$3.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ITH.TO's P/E ratio is -117.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ITH.TO's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ITH.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ITH.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs ASE.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ASE.CN has a market cap of 724.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ASE.CN trades at CA$1.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ASE.CN's P/E ratio is -4.93. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ASE.CN's ROE of +89.41%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ASE.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ASE.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs BSX.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, BSX.TO has a market cap of 720.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while BSX.TO trades at CA$1.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas BSX.TO's P/E ratio is -76.50. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to BSX.TO's ROE of -0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to BSX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check BSX.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs FF.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, FF.TO has a market cap of 691.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while FF.TO trades at CA$0.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas FF.TO's P/E ratio is -7.14. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to FF.TO's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to FF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check FF.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs JAG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, JAG.TO has a market cap of 668.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while JAG.TO trades at CA$7.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas JAG.TO's P/E ratio is -29.04. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to JAG.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to JAG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check JAG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs AR.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, AR.TO has a market cap of 659.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while AR.TO trades at CA$0.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas AR.TO's P/E ratio is -1.44. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to AR.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to AR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check AR.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs FDR.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, FDR.V has a market cap of 599.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while FDR.V trades at CA$4.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas FDR.V's P/E ratio is -43.42. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to FDR.V's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to FDR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check FDR.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs TRX.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, TRX.TO has a market cap of 553.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while TRX.TO trades at CA$1.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas TRX.TO's P/E ratio is -19.30. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to TRX.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to TRX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check TRX.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs MND.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, MND.TO has a market cap of 483.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while MND.TO trades at CA$5.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas MND.TO's P/E ratio is 6.31. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to MND.TO's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to MND.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check MND.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SBI.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SBI.TO has a market cap of 455.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SBI.TO trades at CA$5.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SBI.TO's P/E ratio is 7.42. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SBI.TO's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to SBI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SBI.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs VGZ.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, VGZ.TO has a market cap of 433.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while VGZ.TO trades at CA$2.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas VGZ.TO's P/E ratio is -37.37. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to VGZ.TO's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to VGZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check VGZ.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SGD.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SGD.CN has a market cap of 416.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SGD.CN trades at CA$3.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SGD.CN's P/E ratio is -28.64. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SGD.CN's ROE of -0.64%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to SGD.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SGD.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs GOLD.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, GOLD.TO has a market cap of 391.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while GOLD.TO trades at CA$1.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas GOLD.TO's P/E ratio is -22.87. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to GOLD.TO's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to GOLD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check GOLD.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs MOZ.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, MOZ.TO has a market cap of 380M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while MOZ.TO trades at CA$0.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas MOZ.TO's P/E ratio is -16.20. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to MOZ.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to MOZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check MOZ.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs STGO.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, STGO.TO has a market cap of 361.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while STGO.TO trades at CA$1.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas STGO.TO's P/E ratio is 8.41. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to STGO.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to STGO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check STGO.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs NEXG.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, NEXG.V has a market cap of 289.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while NEXG.V trades at CA$1.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas NEXG.V's P/E ratio is -7.08. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to NEXG.V's ROE of -0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to NEXG.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check NEXG.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs DNG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, DNG.TO has a market cap of 266.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while DNG.TO trades at CA$6.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas DNG.TO's P/E ratio is 9.22. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to DNG.TO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to DNG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check DNG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs ELO.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ELO.TO has a market cap of 254.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ELO.TO trades at CA$2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ELO.TO's P/E ratio is -26.87. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ELO.TO's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ELO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ELO.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs LN.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, LN.TO has a market cap of 253.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while LN.TO trades at CA$1.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas LN.TO's P/E ratio is -34.50. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to LN.TO's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to LN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check LN.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs CBR.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, CBR.V has a market cap of 251M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while CBR.V trades at CA$0.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas CBR.V's P/E ratio is -19.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to CBR.V's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to CBR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check CBR.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs STLR.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, STLR.TO has a market cap of 214.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while STLR.TO trades at CA$1.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas STLR.TO's P/E ratio is -8.65. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to STLR.TO's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to STLR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check STLR.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs GHRT.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, GHRT.V has a market cap of 175.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while GHRT.V trades at CA$1.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas GHRT.V's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to GHRT.V's ROE of -0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to GHRT.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check GHRT.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs XTG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, XTG.TO has a market cap of 150.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while XTG.TO trades at CA$3.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas XTG.TO's P/E ratio is 29.45. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to XTG.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to XTG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check XTG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs G.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, G.TO has a market cap of 145.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while G.TO trades at CA$1.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas G.TO's P/E ratio is -13.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to G.TO's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to G.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check G.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs TNX.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, TNX.TO has a market cap of 128.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while TNX.TO trades at CA$0.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas TNX.TO's P/E ratio is 46.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to TNX.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to TNX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check TNX.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs CGC.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, CGC.V has a market cap of 126.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while CGC.V trades at CA$0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas CGC.V's P/E ratio is -30.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to CGC.V's ROE of -4.54%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to CGC.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check CGC.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs ESM.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ESM.TO has a market cap of 123.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ESM.TO trades at CA$0.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ESM.TO's P/E ratio is -28.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ESM.TO's ROE of +1.53%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ESM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ESM.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs CCM.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, CCM.TO has a market cap of 120.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while CCM.TO trades at CA$0.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas CCM.TO's P/E ratio is -56.50. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to CCM.TO's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to CCM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check CCM.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs SANU.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SANU.CN has a market cap of 120.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SANU.CN trades at CA$0.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SANU.CN's P/E ratio is -28.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SANU.CN's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to SANU.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SANU.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs BLLG.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, BLLG.CN has a market cap of 117.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while BLLG.CN trades at CA$0.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas BLLG.CN's P/E ratio is -16.20. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to BLLG.CN's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to BLLG.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check BLLG.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs COG.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, COG.TO has a market cap of 114.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while COG.TO trades at CA$0.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas COG.TO's P/E ratio is -56.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to COG.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to COG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check COG.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs VEIN.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, VEIN.V has a market cap of 113.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while VEIN.V trades at CA$0.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas VEIN.V's P/E ratio is -14.83. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to VEIN.V's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to VEIN.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check VEIN.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs AMQ.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, AMQ.CN has a market cap of 111.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while AMQ.CN trades at CA$0.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas AMQ.CN's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to AMQ.CN's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to AMQ.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check AMQ.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs YARR.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, YARR.V has a market cap of 111.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while YARR.V trades at CA$0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas YARR.V's P/E ratio is -11.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to YARR.V's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to YARR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check YARR.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs NOM.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, NOM.CN has a market cap of 104.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while NOM.CN trades at CA$1.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas NOM.CN's P/E ratio is -25.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to NOM.CN's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to NOM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check NOM.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs MAW.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, MAW.TO has a market cap of 102M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while MAW.TO trades at CA$0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas MAW.TO's P/E ratio is -17.25. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to MAW.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to MAW.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check MAW.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs AGC.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, AGC.CN has a market cap of 99.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while AGC.CN trades at CA$0.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas AGC.CN's P/E ratio is -11.14. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to AGC.CN's ROE of +0.76%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to AGC.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check AGC.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs SIG.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, SIG.CN has a market cap of 80M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while SIG.CN trades at CA$0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas SIG.CN's P/E ratio is -32.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to SIG.CN's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to SIG.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check SIG.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs GPAC.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, GPAC.V has a market cap of 71.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while GPAC.V trades at CA$0.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas GPAC.V's P/E ratio is -3.88. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to GPAC.V's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to GPAC.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check GPAC.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs TML.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, TML.TO has a market cap of 64.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while TML.TO trades at CA$0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas TML.TO's P/E ratio is -3.14. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to TML.TO's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to TML.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check TML.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs HMR.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, HMR.V has a market cap of 61.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while HMR.V trades at CA$0.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas HMR.V's P/E ratio is -10.12. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to HMR.V's ROE of -1.83%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to HMR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check HMR.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs KLDC.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, KLDC.V has a market cap of 54.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while KLDC.V trades at CA$0.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas KLDC.V's P/E ratio is -16.17. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to KLDC.V's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to KLDC.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check KLDC.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs RISE.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, RISE.CN has a market cap of 53M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while RISE.CN trades at CA$0.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas RISE.CN's P/E ratio is -8.43. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to RISE.CN's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to RISE.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check RISE.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs ME.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, ME.TO has a market cap of 50.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while ME.TO trades at CA$0.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas ME.TO's P/E ratio is -1.85. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to ME.TO's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to ME.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check ME.TO's competition here
CNL.TO vs VLC.V Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, VLC.V has a market cap of 43.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while VLC.V trades at CA$0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas VLC.V's P/E ratio is -22.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to VLC.V's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to VLC.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check VLC.V's competition here
CNL.TO vs HWG.CN Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, HWG.CN has a market cap of 41.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while HWG.CN trades at CA$0.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas HWG.CN's P/E ratio is -27.00. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to HWG.CN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is less volatile compared to HWG.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check HWG.CN's competition here
CNL.TO vs NHK.TO Comparison April 2026
CNL.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CNL.TO stands at 2.6B. In comparison, NHK.TO has a market cap of 39M. Regarding current trading prices, CNL.TO is priced at CA$27.93, while NHK.TO trades at CA$0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CNL.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -35.50, whereas NHK.TO's P/E ratio is -2.60. In terms of profitability, CNL.TO's ROE is -0.56%, compared to NHK.TO's ROE of -0.82%. Regarding short-term risk, CNL.TO is more volatile compared to NHK.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CNL.TO.Check NHK.TO's competition here