Capital Senior Living Corporation
Capital Senior Living Corporation (CSU) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (CSU) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Medical - Care Facilities Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CSU | $33.54 | -2.09% | 223.7M | 0.67 | $49.82 | N/A |
| HCA | $334.32 | -2.10% | 80.5B | 14.87 | $22.50 | +0.83% |
| FMS | $26.43 | -1.23% | 15.5B | 21.31 | $1.24 | +2.99% |
| THC | $153.02 | +3.13% | 14.2B | 9.61 | $15.91 | N/A |
| SOLV | $74.75 | +1.11% | 12.9B | 34.44 | $2.17 | N/A |
| DVA | $145.17 | +0.28% | 11B | 14.40 | $10.08 | N/A |
| EHC | $107.67 | +0.50% | 10.9B | 22.16 | $4.86 | +0.63% |
| UHS | $155.60 | +0.09% | 10B | 8.74 | $17.80 | +0.52% |
| OSH | $39.00 | +0.08% | 9.5B | -17.65 | -$2.21 | N/A |
| ENSG | $150.06 | +8.92% | 8.6B | 27.18 | $5.52 | +0.16% |
Stock Comparison
CSU vs HCA Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, HCA has a market cap of 80.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while HCA trades at $334.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas HCA's P/E ratio is 14.87. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to HCA's ROE of -2.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to HCA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check HCA's competition here
CSU vs FMS Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, FMS has a market cap of 15.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while FMS trades at $26.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas FMS's P/E ratio is 21.31. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to FMS's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to FMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check FMS's competition here
CSU vs THC Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, THC has a market cap of 14.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while THC trades at $153.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas THC's P/E ratio is 9.61. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to THC's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to THC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check THC's competition here
CSU vs SOLV Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, SOLV has a market cap of 12.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while SOLV trades at $74.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas SOLV's P/E ratio is 34.44. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to SOLV's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to SOLV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check SOLV's competition here
CSU vs DVA Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, DVA has a market cap of 11B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while DVA trades at $145.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas DVA's P/E ratio is 14.40. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to DVA's ROE of +3.94%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to DVA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check DVA's competition here
CSU vs EHC Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, EHC has a market cap of 10.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while EHC trades at $107.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas EHC's P/E ratio is 22.16. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to EHC's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to EHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check EHC's competition here
CSU vs UHS Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, UHS has a market cap of 10B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while UHS trades at $155.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas UHS's P/E ratio is 8.74. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to UHS's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to UHS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check UHS's competition here
CSU vs OSH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, OSH has a market cap of 9.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while OSH trades at $39.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas OSH's P/E ratio is -17.65. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to OSH's ROE of +4.64%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to OSH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check OSH's competition here
CSU vs ENSG Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, ENSG has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while ENSG trades at $150.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas ENSG's P/E ratio is 27.18. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to ENSG's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to ENSG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check ENSG's competition here
CSU vs CHE Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, CHE has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while CHE trades at $470.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas CHE's P/E ratio is 22.90. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to CHE's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to CHE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check CHE's competition here
CSU vs LHCG Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, LHCG has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while LHCG trades at $169.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas LHCG's P/E ratio is 82.83. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to LHCG's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to LHCG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check LHCG's competition here
CSU vs OPCH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, OPCH has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while OPCH trades at $29.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas OPCH's P/E ratio is 23.75. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to OPCH's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to OPCH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check OPCH's competition here
CSU vs AMED Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AMED has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AMED trades at $97.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AMED's P/E ratio is 36.13. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AMED's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to AMED. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AMED's competition here
CSU vs SGRY Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, SGRY has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while SGRY trades at $21.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas SGRY's P/E ratio is -13.90. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to SGRY's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to SGRY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check SGRY's competition here
CSU vs ACHC Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, ACHC has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while ACHC trades at $22.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas ACHC's P/E ratio is 10.91. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to ACHC's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to ACHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check ACHC's competition here
CSU vs ADUS Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, ADUS has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while ADUS trades at $109.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas ADUS's P/E ratio is 24.76. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to ADUS's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to ADUS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check ADUS's competition here
CSU vs SEM Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, SEM has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while SEM trades at $14.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas SEM's P/E ratio is 22.98. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to SEM's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to SEM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check SEM's competition here
CSU vs AMEH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AMEH has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AMEH trades at $40.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AMEH's P/E ratio is 39.25. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AMEH's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to AMEH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AMEH's competition here
CSU vs BKD Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, BKD has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while BKD trades at $7.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas BKD's P/E ratio is -7.22. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to BKD's ROE of -0.96%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to BKD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check BKD's competition here
CSU vs LFST Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, LFST has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while LFST trades at $4.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas LFST's P/E ratio is -46.00. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to LFST's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to LFST. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check LFST's competition here
CSU vs ARDT Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, ARDT has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while ARDT trades at $11.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas ARDT's P/E ratio is 6.58. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to ARDT's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to ARDT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check ARDT's competition here
CSU vs NHC Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, NHC has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while NHC trades at $96.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas NHC's P/E ratio is 13.96. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to NHC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to NHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check NHC's competition here
CSU vs BKDT Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, BKDT has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while BKDT trades at $77.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas BKDT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to BKDT's ROE of -0.96%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to BKDT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check BKDT's competition here
CSU vs ASTH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, ASTH has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while ASTH trades at $23.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas ASTH's P/E ratio is 31.88. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to ASTH's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to ASTH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check ASTH's competition here
CSU vs USPH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, USPH has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while USPH trades at $74.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas USPH's P/E ratio is 34.03. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to USPH's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to USPH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check USPH's competition here
CSU vs MD Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, MD has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while MD trades at $12.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas MD's P/E ratio is -12.58. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to MD's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to MD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check MD's competition here
CSU vs HCSG Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, HCSG has a market cap of 966.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while HCSG trades at $13.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas HCSG's P/E ratio is 94.64. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to HCSG's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to HCSG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check HCSG's competition here
CSU vs AGL Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AGL has a market cap of 852.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AGL trades at $2.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AGL's P/E ratio is -3.32. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AGL's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to AGL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AGL's competition here
CSU vs PNTG Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, PNTG has a market cap of 805.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while PNTG trades at $23.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas PNTG's P/E ratio is 30.74. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to PNTG's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to PNTG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check PNTG's competition here
CSU vs AVAH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AVAH has a market cap of 772.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AVAH trades at $3.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AVAH's P/E ratio is 132.00. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AVAH's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to AVAH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AVAH's competition here
CSU vs AMN Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AMN has a market cap of 758.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AMN trades at $19.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AMN's P/E ratio is -4.58. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AMN's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to AMN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AMN's competition here
CSU vs INNV Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, INNV has a market cap of 518.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while INNV trades at $3.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas INNV's P/E ratio is -16.00. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to INNV's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to INNV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check INNV's competition here
CSU vs SNDA Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, SNDA has a market cap of 463M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while SNDA trades at $24.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas SNDA's P/E ratio is -6.76. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to SNDA's ROE of -0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to SNDA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check SNDA's competition here
CSU vs AUNA Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AUNA has a market cap of 462.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AUNA trades at $6.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AUNA's P/E ratio is 9.47. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AUNA's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to AUNA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AUNA's competition here
CSU vs CCRN Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, CCRN has a market cap of 445.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while CCRN trades at $13.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas CCRN's P/E ratio is -25.19. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to CCRN's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to CCRN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check CCRN's competition here
CSU vs TALKW Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, TALKW has a market cap of 428.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while TALKW trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas TALKW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to TALKW's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to TALKW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check TALKW's competition here
CSU vs TALK Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, TALK has a market cap of 420.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while TALK trades at $2.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas TALK's P/E ratio is 125.75. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to TALK's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to TALK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check TALK's competition here
CSU vs AIRS Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AIRS has a market cap of 403.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AIRS trades at $6.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AIRS's P/E ratio is -22.28. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AIRS's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to AIRS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AIRS's competition here
CSU vs CMPS Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, CMPS has a market cap of 402M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while CMPS trades at $4.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas CMPS's P/E ratio is -2.18. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to CMPS's ROE of -0.72%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to CMPS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check CMPS's competition here
CSU vs CYH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, CYH has a market cap of 387.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while CYH trades at $2.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas CYH's P/E ratio is -1.88. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to CYH's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to CYH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check CYH's competition here
CSU vs EHAB Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, EHAB has a market cap of 342.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while EHAB trades at $6.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas EHAB's P/E ratio is -2.44. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to EHAB's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to EHAB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check EHAB's competition here
CSU vs TOI Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, TOI has a market cap of 338.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while TOI trades at $3.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas TOI's P/E ratio is -5.26. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to TOI's ROE of -4.83%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to TOI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check TOI's competition here
CSU vs TOIIW Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, TOIIW has a market cap of 326.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while TOIIW trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas TOIIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to TOIIW's ROE of -4.83%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to TOIIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check TOIIW's competition here
CSU vs AONC Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AONC has a market cap of 299M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AONC trades at $10.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AONC's P/E ratio is -11.52. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AONC's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to AONC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AONC's competition here
CSU vs JYNT Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, JYNT has a market cap of 173.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while JYNT trades at $11.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas JYNT's P/E ratio is -113.60. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to JYNT's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to JYNT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check JYNT's competition here
CSU vs BTMD Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, BTMD has a market cap of 165.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while BTMD trades at $4.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas BTMD's P/E ratio is 7.45. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to BTMD's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to BTMD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check BTMD's competition here
CSU vs DCGO Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, DCGO has a market cap of 144.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while DCGO trades at $1.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas DCGO's P/E ratio is -146.00. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to DCGO's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to DCGO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check DCGO's competition here
CSU vs FVE Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, FVE has a market cap of 98.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while FVE trades at $2.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas FVE's P/E ratio is -5.64. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to FVE's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to FVE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check FVE's competition here
CSU vs KDLYW Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, KDLYW has a market cap of 96.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while KDLYW trades at $18.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas KDLYW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to KDLYW's ROE of -1.46%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to KDLYW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check KDLYW's competition here
CSU vs ALR Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, ALR has a market cap of 44.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while ALR trades at $1.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas ALR's P/E ratio is -1.11. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to ALR's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to ALR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check ALR's competition here
CSU vs MODV Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, MODV has a market cap of 43.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while MODV trades at $3.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas MODV's P/E ratio is -0.19. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to MODV's ROE of +6.87%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to MODV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check MODV's competition here
CSU vs CCEL Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, CCEL has a market cap of 40.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while CCEL trades at $5.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas CCEL's P/E ratio is -252.00. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to CCEL's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to CCEL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check CCEL's competition here
CSU vs IMAC Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, IMAC has a market cap of 33.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while IMAC trades at $1.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas IMAC's P/E ratio is -2.27. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to IMAC's ROE of -0.78%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to IMAC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check IMAC's competition here
CSU vs PIII Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, PIII has a market cap of 23.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while PIII trades at $7.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas PIII's P/E ratio is -0.14. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to PIII's ROE of -1.29%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to PIII. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check PIII's competition here
CSU vs AMS Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AMS has a market cap of 17.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AMS trades at $2.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AMS's P/E ratio is 12.71. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AMS's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to AMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AMS's competition here
CSU vs AIH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, AIH has a market cap of 15.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while AIH trades at $0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas AIH's P/E ratio is -2.78. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to AIH's ROE of +1.16%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to AIH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check AIH's competition here
CSU vs CANO Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, CANO has a market cap of 12.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while CANO trades at $2.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas CANO's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to CANO's ROE of -1.49%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to CANO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check CANO's competition here
CSU vs FTRP Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, FTRP has a market cap of 9.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while FTRP trades at $0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas FTRP's P/E ratio is -1.22. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to FTRP's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to FTRP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check FTRP's competition here
CSU vs GBNH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, GBNH has a market cap of 5.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while GBNH trades at $0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas GBNH's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to GBNH's ROE of +15.74%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to GBNH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check GBNH's competition here
CSU vs RHE Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, RHE has a market cap of 5.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while RHE trades at $2.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas RHE's P/E ratio is -1.79. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to RHE's ROE of +1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to RHE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check RHE's competition here
CSU vs MNDR Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, MNDR has a market cap of 4.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while MNDR trades at $1.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas MNDR's P/E ratio is -0.15. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to MNDR's ROE of -5.70%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to MNDR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check MNDR's competition here
CSU vs ATIP Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, ATIP has a market cap of 2.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while ATIP trades at $0.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas ATIP's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to ATIP's ROE of +1.77%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to ATIP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check ATIP's competition here
CSU vs NIVFW Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, NIVFW has a market cap of 2.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while NIVFW trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas NIVFW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to NIVFW's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to NIVFW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check NIVFW's competition here
CSU vs IMACW Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, IMACW has a market cap of 1.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while IMACW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas IMACW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to IMACW's ROE of +2.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to IMACW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check IMACW's competition here
CSU vs SYRA Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, SYRA has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while SYRA trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas SYRA's P/E ratio is -0.32. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to SYRA's ROE of -1.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to SYRA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check SYRA's competition here
CSU vs CCM Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, CCM has a market cap of 967.6K. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while CCM trades at $5.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas CCM's P/E ratio is -0.61. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to CCM's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to CCM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check CCM's competition here
CSU vs RHE-PA Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, RHE-PA has a market cap of 674.5K. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while RHE-PA trades at $0.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas RHE-PA's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to RHE-PA's ROE of +1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to RHE-PA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check RHE-PA's competition here
CSU vs BACK Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, BACK has a market cap of 227.1K. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while BACK trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas BACK's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to BACK's ROE of +2.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to BACK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check BACK's competition here
CSU vs IONM Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, IONM has a market cap of 176.4K. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while IONM trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas IONM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to IONM's ROE of +0.75%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to IONM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check IONM's competition here
CSU vs NVOS Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, NVOS has a market cap of 65.1K. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while NVOS trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas NVOS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to NVOS's ROE of -1.20%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to NVOS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check NVOS's competition here
CSU vs PIIIW Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, PIIIW has a market cap of 33.7K. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while PIIIW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas PIIIW's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to PIIIW's ROE of -1.29%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to PIIIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check PIIIW's competition here
CSU vs TLMD Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, TLMD has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while TLMD trades at $3.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas TLMD's P/E ratio is -1.60. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to TLMD's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to TLMD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check TLMD's competition here
CSU vs TVTY Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, TVTY has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while TVTY trades at $32.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas TVTY's P/E ratio is 19.06. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to TVTY's ROE of +1.75%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to TVTY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check TVTY's competition here
CSU vs SLHGP Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, SLHGP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while SLHGP trades at $12.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas SLHGP's P/E ratio is -30.38. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to SLHGP's ROE of -0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to SLHGP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check SLHGP's competition here
CSU vs SLHG Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, SLHG has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while SLHG trades at $0.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas SLHG's P/E ratio is -1.48. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to SLHG's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to SLHG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check SLHG's competition here
CSU vs NFH Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, NFH has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while NFH trades at $11.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas NFH's P/E ratio is -19.75. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to NFH's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to NFH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check NFH's competition here
CSU vs HNGR Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, HNGR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while HNGR trades at $18.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas HNGR's P/E ratio is 19.71. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to HNGR's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to HNGR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check HNGR's competition here
CSU vs DCGOW Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, DCGOW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while DCGOW trades at $1.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas DCGOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to DCGOW's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to DCGOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check DCGOW's competition here
CSU vs DVCR Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, DVCR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while DVCR trades at $10.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas DVCR's P/E ratio is 28.34. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to DVCR's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is more volatile compared to DVCR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check DVCR's competition here
CSU vs TLMDW Comparison July 2025
CSU plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, CSU stands at 223.7M. In comparison, TLMDW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, CSU is priced at $33.54, while TLMDW trades at $0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
CSU currently has a P/E ratio of 0.67, whereas TLMDW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CSU's ROE is +2.23%, compared to TLMDW's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, CSU is less volatile compared to TLMDW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CSU.Check TLMDW's competition here