Capita plc

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, WOLTF has a market cap of 36.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while WOLTF trades at $157.45.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas WOLTF's P/E ratio is 28.47. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to WOLTF's ROE of +0.67%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to WOLTF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check WOLTF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, WTKWY has a market cap of 36.3B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while WTKWY trades at $154.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas WTKWY's P/E ratio is 28.00. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to WTKWY's ROE of +0.67%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to WTKWY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check WTKWY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, BXBLY has a market cap of 21B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while BXBLY trades at $30.49.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas BXBLY's P/E ratio is 25.65. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to BXBLY's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to BXBLY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check BXBLY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, BMBLF has a market cap of 20.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while BMBLF trades at $15.27.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas BMBLF's P/E ratio is 25.45. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to BMBLF's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to BMBLF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check BMBLF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, RKLIF has a market cap of 12.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while RKLIF trades at $4.87.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas RKLIF's P/E ratio is 37.46. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to RKLIF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and RKLIF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check RKLIF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, IKTSF has a market cap of 9.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while IKTSF trades at $63.22.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas IKTSF's P/E ratio is 22.26. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to IKTSF's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and IKTSF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check IKTSF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, IKTSY has a market cap of 9.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while IKTSY trades at $61.69.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas IKTSY's P/E ratio is 21.71. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to IKTSY's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to IKTSY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check IKTSY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, SDXOF has a market cap of 9.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while SDXOF trades at $63.05.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas SDXOF's P/E ratio is 11.94. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to SDXOF's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and SDXOF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SDXOF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, SDXAY has a market cap of 8.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while SDXAY trades at $12.07.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas SDXAY's P/E ratio is 11.34. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to SDXAY's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to SDXAY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check SDXAY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, TOPPY has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while TOPPY trades at $13.92.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas TOPPY's P/E ratio is 13.92. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to TOPPY's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and TOPPY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TOPPY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, TONPF has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while TONPF trades at $30.21.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas TONPF's P/E ratio is 16.97. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to TONPF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to TONPF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check TONPF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, DNPLY has a market cap of 7.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while DNPLY trades at $7.93.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas DNPLY's P/E ratio is 9.91. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to DNPLY's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to DNPLY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check DNPLY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, INPOY has a market cap of 7.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while INPOY trades at $7.11.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas INPOY's P/E ratio is 22.20. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to INPOY's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to INPOY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check INPOY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ELSSF has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ELSSF trades at $29.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ELSSF's P/E ratio is 16.96. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ELSSF's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and ELSSF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ELSSF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, DNPCF has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while DNPCF trades at $14.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas DNPCF's P/E ratio is 9.01. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to DNPCF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to DNPCF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check DNPCF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, CTAGY has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while CTAGY trades at $14.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas CTAGY's P/E ratio is 4.11. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to CTAGY's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and CTAGY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CTAGY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, INPOF has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while INPOF trades at $9.99.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas INPOF's P/E ratio is 38.42. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to INPOF's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and INPOF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check INPOF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ISFFF has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ISFFF trades at $28.90.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ISFFF's P/E ratio is 12.96. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ISFFF's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to ISFFF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check ISFFF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, TLPFF has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while TLPFF trades at $79.73.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas TLPFF's P/E ratio is 7.92. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to TLPFF's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to TLPFF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check TLPFF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, TLPFY has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while TLPFY trades at $39.38.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas TLPFY's P/E ratio is 7.84. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to TLPFY's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to TLPFY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check TLPFY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, SECCF has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while SECCF trades at $2.86.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas SECCF's P/E ratio is 57.20. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to SECCF's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and SECCF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SECCF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, SCGPY has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while SCGPY trades at $2.80.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas SCGPY's P/E ratio is 54.80. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to SCGPY's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and SCGPY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SCGPY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, MITFF has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while MITFF trades at $2.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas MITFF's P/E ratio is 20.01. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to MITFF's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to MITFF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check MITFF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, MITFY has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while MITFY trades at $7.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas MITFY's P/E ratio is 17.80. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to MITFY's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to MITFY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check MITFY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ACENY has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ACENY trades at $9.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ACENY's P/E ratio is 28.44. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ACENY's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to ACENY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check ACENY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, APLUF has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while APLUF trades at $12.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas APLUF's P/E ratio is 27.27. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to APLUF's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to APLUF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check APLUF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, RELOF has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while RELOF trades at $12.05.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas RELOF's P/E ratio is 6.58. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to RELOF's ROE of +0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and RELOF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check RELOF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ISSDY has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ISSDY trades at $9.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ISSDY's P/E ratio is 12.57. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ISSDY's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to ISSDY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check ISSDY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, TCLCF has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while TCLCF trades at $14.63.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas TCLCF's P/E ratio is 9.44. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to TCLCF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and TCLCF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TCLCF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, TCLAF has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while TCLAF trades at $13.95.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas TCLAF's P/E ratio is 8.94. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to TCLAF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to TCLAF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check TCLAF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, IPHLF has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while IPHLF trades at $4.42.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas IPHLF's P/E ratio is 27.63. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to IPHLF's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to IPHLF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check IPHLF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, JSVGF has a market cap of 850.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while JSVGF trades at $1.18.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas JSVGF's P/E ratio is 117.73. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to JSVGF's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and JSVGF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check JSVGF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, STGXF has a market cap of 842.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while STGXF trades at $6.21.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas STGXF's P/E ratio is 19.41. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to STGXF's ROE of +0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and STGXF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check STGXF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, RKSLF has a market cap of 589.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while RKSLF trades at $10.18.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas RKSLF's P/E ratio is 67.87. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to RKSLF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to RKSLF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check RKSLF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, GLCDF has a market cap of 539.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while GLCDF trades at $18.40.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas GLCDF's P/E ratio is 8.89. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to GLCDF's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to GLCDF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check GLCDF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, GDIFF has a market cap of 536.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while GDIFF trades at $22.77.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas GDIFF's P/E ratio is 19.46. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to GDIFF's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and GDIFF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check GDIFF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ITEPF has a market cap of 448.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ITEPF trades at $1.51.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ITEPF's P/E ratio is -13.68. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ITEPF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and ITEPF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ITEPF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, IRMTF has a market cap of 442.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while IRMTF trades at $23.23.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas IRMTF's P/E ratio is 21.74. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to IRMTF's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and IRMTF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check IRMTF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, HZNOF has a market cap of 431.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while HZNOF trades at $6.93.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas HZNOF's P/E ratio is 14.74. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to HZNOF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and HZNOF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check HZNOF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, CLNFF has a market cap of 424.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while CLNFF trades at $37.40.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas CLNFF's P/E ratio is 133.57. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to CLNFF's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and CLNFF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CLNFF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, DELRF has a market cap of 328M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while DELRF trades at $1.67.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas DELRF's P/E ratio is -15.18. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to DELRF's ROE of -5.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and DELRF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check DELRF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, DLUEY has a market cap of 327.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while DLUEY trades at $5.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas DLUEY's P/E ratio is -15.62. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to DLUEY's ROE of -5.33%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and DLUEY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check DLUEY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, KPGHF has a market cap of 323.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while KPGHF trades at $7.15.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas KPGHF's P/E ratio is 119.08. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to KPGHF's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to KPGHF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check KPGHF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, KBRLF has a market cap of 323.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while KBRLF trades at $25.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas KBRLF's P/E ratio is 20.52. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to KBRLF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to KBRLF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check KBRLF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, VSSPY has a market cap of 314.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while VSSPY trades at $4.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas VSSPY's P/E ratio is 5.80. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to VSSPY's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to VSSPY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check VSSPY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ITEGY has a market cap of 244.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ITEGY trades at $0.82.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ITEGY's P/E ratio is -7.46. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ITEGY's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and ITEGY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ITEGY's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, PCRRF has a market cap of 164M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while PCRRF trades at $11.39.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas PCRRF's P/E ratio is 7.08. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to PCRRF's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to PCRRF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check PCRRF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, CERGF has a market cap of 138.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while CERGF trades at $4.46.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas CERGF's P/E ratio is 63.71. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to CERGF's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and CERGF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CERGF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, FLNCF has a market cap of 130.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while FLNCF trades at $0.29.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas FLNCF's P/E ratio is -29.00. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to FLNCF's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to FLNCF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check FLNCF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, AJISF has a market cap of 130.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while AJISF trades at $15.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas AJISF's P/E ratio is 8.86. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to AJISF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to AJISF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check AJISF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, CRKT has a market cap of 119.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while CRKT trades at $0.22.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas CRKT's P/E ratio is -3.44. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to CRKT's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to CRKT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check CRKT's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, PCOA has a market cap of 113.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while PCOA trades at $150,000.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas PCOA's P/E ratio is 8.08. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to PCOA's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. CTAGF has daily volatility of 0.00 and PCOA has daily volatility of N/A.Check PCOA's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ASFH has a market cap of 112.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ASFH trades at $1.37.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ASFH's P/E ratio is -137.00. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ASFH's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and ASFH have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ASFH's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, WTLLF has a market cap of 81.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while WTLLF trades at $4.19.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas WTLLF's P/E ratio is 16.12. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to WTLLF's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to WTLLF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check WTLLF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, PGWFF has a market cap of 78.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while PGWFF trades at $1.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas PGWFF's P/E ratio is 52.00. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to PGWFF's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to PGWFF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check PGWFF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, RDCPF has a market cap of 63.9M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while RDCPF trades at $3.47.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas RDCPF's P/E ratio is 173.50. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to RDCPF's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to RDCPF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check RDCPF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, DCMDF has a market cap of 61.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while DCMDF trades at $1.11.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas DCMDF's P/E ratio is 12.28. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to DCMDF's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to DCMDF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check DCMDF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, SRRPF has a market cap of 54.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while SRRPF trades at $5.25.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas SRRPF's P/E ratio is 13.82. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to SRRPF's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to SRRPF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check SRRPF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ESTTF has a market cap of 44.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ESTTF trades at $8.14.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ESTTF's P/E ratio is 0.00. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ESTTF's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to ESTTF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check ESTTF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, UWHGF has a market cap of 32.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while UWHGF trades at $1.45.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas UWHGF's P/E ratio is -8.53. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to UWHGF's ROE of -3.11%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and UWHGF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check UWHGF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, FTBGF has a market cap of 29M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while FTBGF trades at $0.03.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas FTBGF's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to FTBGF's ROE of -0.86%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and FTBGF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check FTBGF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, SFRX has a market cap of 23.3M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while SFRX trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas SFRX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to SFRX's ROE of +1.30%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to SFRX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check SFRX's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, NSYC has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while NSYC trades at $424.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas NSYC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to NSYC's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and NSYC have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NSYC's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ADMQ has a market cap of 6.4M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ADMQ trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ADMQ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ADMQ's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to ADMQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check ADMQ's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, GPOX has a market cap of 5.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while GPOX trades at $0.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas GPOX's P/E ratio is -1.40. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to GPOX's ROE of +0.75%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to GPOX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check GPOX's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, REPO has a market cap of 4.7M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while REPO trades at $0.03.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas REPO's P/E ratio is -0.31. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to REPO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to REPO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check REPO's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ELVG has a market cap of 4.6M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ELVG trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ELVG's P/E ratio is 0.37. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ELVG's ROE of +0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to ELVG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check ELVG's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, BLIS has a market cap of 3.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while BLIS trades at $0.02.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas BLIS's P/E ratio is -1.50. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to BLIS's ROE of -2.42%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to BLIS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check BLIS's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, CGRW has a market cap of 2.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while CGRW trades at $0.02.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas CGRW's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to CGRW's ROE of +1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to CGRW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check CGRW's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, GNOLF has a market cap of 2M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while GNOLF trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas GNOLF's P/E ratio is -0.14. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to GNOLF's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and GNOLF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check GNOLF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, AWAW has a market cap of 1.8M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while AWAW trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas AWAW's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to AWAW's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and AWAW have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check AWAW's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, LMTI has a market cap of 1.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while LMTI trades at $0.14.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas LMTI's P/E ratio is -0.74. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to LMTI's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to LMTI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check LMTI's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ANMP has a market cap of 1.5M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ANMP trades at $0.40.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ANMP's P/E ratio is 2.35. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ANMP's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and ANMP have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ANMP's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, UNDR has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while UNDR trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas UNDR's P/E ratio is 0.02. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to UNDR's ROE of +1.37%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and UNDR have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check UNDR's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, SAYFF has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while SAYFF trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas SAYFF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to SAYFF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and SAYFF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SAYFF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, OODH has a market cap of 1.1M. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while OODH trades at $0.23.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas OODH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to OODH's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and OODH have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check OODH's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, JFIL has a market cap of 753.5K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while JFIL trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas JFIL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to JFIL's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and JFIL have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check JFIL's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, HHGI has a market cap of 675.4K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while HHGI trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas HHGI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to HHGI's ROE of -0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and HHGI have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check HHGI's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, XCPL has a market cap of 674.1K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while XCPL trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas XCPL's P/E ratio is 0.02. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to XCPL's ROE of +7.18%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to XCPL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check XCPL's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, CLRYF has a market cap of 579.9K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while CLRYF trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas CLRYF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to CLRYF's ROE of +1.68%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to CLRYF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check CLRYF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, MTPR has a market cap of 408K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while MTPR trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas MTPR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to MTPR's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to MTPR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check MTPR's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, DTSL has a market cap of 391.3K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while DTSL trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas DTSL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to DTSL's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to DTSL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check DTSL's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, WLDPF has a market cap of 301.9K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while WLDPF trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas WLDPF's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to WLDPF's ROE of +0.82%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and WLDPF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check WLDPF's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, OPMG has a market cap of 219.2K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while OPMG trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas OPMG's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to OPMG's ROE of +15.86%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to OPMG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check OPMG's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, IJJP has a market cap of 192.5K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while IJJP trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas IJJP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to IJJP's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and IJJP have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check IJJP's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, DPUI has a market cap of 181.6K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while DPUI trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas DPUI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to DPUI's ROE of +0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and DPUI have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check DPUI's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, IMJX has a market cap of 112.7K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while IMJX trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas IMJX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to IMJX's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to IMJX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check IMJX's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, ECOX has a market cap of 109.6K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while ECOX trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas ECOX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to ECOX's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to ECOX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check ECOX's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, CTGL has a market cap of 104.4K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while CTGL trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas CTGL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to CTGL's ROE of +1.35%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and CTGL have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CTGL's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, NNFC has a market cap of 97.8K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while NNFC trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas NNFC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to NNFC's ROE of -0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to NNFC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check NNFC's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, PIFR has a market cap of 82K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while PIFR trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas PIFR's P/E ratio is -1.40. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to PIFR's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and PIFR have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check PIFR's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, INCC has a market cap of 81.3K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while INCC trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas INCC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to INCC's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and INCC have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check INCC's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, CBMJ has a market cap of 72.4K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while CBMJ trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas CBMJ's P/E ratio is -0.24. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to CBMJ's ROE of -1.58%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and CBMJ have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CBMJ's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, UCPC has a market cap of 56.2K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while UCPC trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas UCPC's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to UCPC's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to UCPC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check UCPC's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, GFGU has a market cap of 48.5K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while GFGU trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas GFGU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to GFGU's ROE of +15.99%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and GFGU have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check GFGU's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, BFLD has a market cap of 43.8K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while BFLD trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas BFLD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to BFLD's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to BFLD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check BFLD's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, SGLS has a market cap of 39.5K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while SGLS trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas SGLS's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to SGLS's ROE of +0.86%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to SGLS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check SGLS's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, AXCG has a market cap of 31.5K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while AXCG trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas AXCG's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to AXCG's ROE of +1.28%. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF is less volatile compared to AXCG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for CTAGF.Check AXCG's competition here

CTAGF plays a significant role within the Industrials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, CTAGF stands at 270.7M. In comparison, PVNO has a market cap of 26.8K. Regarding current trading prices, CTAGF is priced at $2.38, while PVNO trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

CTAGF currently has a P/E ratio of 2.70, whereas PVNO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, CTAGF's ROE is -0.22%, compared to PVNO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, CTAGF and PVNO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check PVNO's competition here