ECD Automotive Design, Inc.
ECD Automotive Design, Inc. ECDAW Peers
See (ECDAW) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Auto - Manufacturers Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECDAW | $0.01 | -0.67% | 523.7K | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| TSLA | $329.13 | +1.17% | 1.1T | 187.01 | $1.76 | N/A |
| TM | $177.84 | -0.51% | 232.1B | 7.12 | $24.99 | +3.03% |
| RACE | $465.28 | +0.40% | 82.9B | 45.84 | $10.15 | +0.63% |
| GM | $49.28 | +1.28% | 47.4B | 6.88 | $7.16 | +1.03% |
| F-PB | $21.16 | +0.33% | 42.5B | N/A | N/A | +7.07% |
| F-PD | $22.30 | -0.22% | 42.4B | N/A | N/A | +7.07% |
| F-PC | $21.01 | +0.57% | 41.7B | N/A | N/A | +7.07% |
| F | $10.63 | +1.87% | 41.5B | 8.50 | $1.25 | +7.07% |
| STLA | $9.87 | +1.70% | 28.3B | 4.65 | $2.12 | +9.04% |
Stock Comparison
ECDAW vs TSLA Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, TSLA has a market cap of 1.1T. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while TSLA trades at $329.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TSLA's P/E ratio is 187.01. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to TSLA's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to TSLA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs TM Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, TM has a market cap of 232.1B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while TM trades at $177.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TM's P/E ratio is 7.12. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to TM's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to TM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs RACE Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, RACE has a market cap of 82.9B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while RACE trades at $465.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RACE's P/E ratio is 45.84. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to RACE's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to RACE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs GM Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, GM has a market cap of 47.4B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while GM trades at $49.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GM's P/E ratio is 6.88. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to GM's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to GM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs F-PB Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, F-PB has a market cap of 42.5B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while F-PB trades at $21.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas F-PB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to F-PB's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to F-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs F-PD Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, F-PD has a market cap of 42.4B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while F-PD trades at $22.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas F-PD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to F-PD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to F-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs F-PC Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, F-PC has a market cap of 41.7B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while F-PC trades at $21.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas F-PC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to F-PC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to F-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs F Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, F has a market cap of 41.5B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while F trades at $10.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas F's P/E ratio is 8.50. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to F's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to F. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs STLA Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, STLA has a market cap of 28.3B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while STLA trades at $9.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas STLA's P/E ratio is 4.65. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to STLA's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to STLA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs XPEV Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, XPEV has a market cap of 18B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while XPEV trades at $18.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XPEV's P/E ratio is -24.88. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to XPEV's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to XPEV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs RIVN Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, RIVN has a market cap of 15.7B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while RIVN trades at $13.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RIVN's P/E ratio is -3.73. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to RIVN's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to RIVN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs HMC Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, HMC has a market cap of 14.5B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while HMC trades at $29.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HMC's P/E ratio is 8.07. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to HMC's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to HMC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs LI Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, LI has a market cap of 14.4B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while LI trades at $28.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LI's P/E ratio is 26.60. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LI's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to LI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs VFS Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, VFS has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while VFS trades at $3.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VFS's P/E ratio is -2.74. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to VFS's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to VFS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs NIO Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, NIO has a market cap of 7.4B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while NIO trades at $3.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NIO's P/E ratio is -2.15. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to NIO's ROE of -2.94%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to NIO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs ZK Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, ZK has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while ZK trades at $26.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ZK's P/E ratio is -9.25. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ZK's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to ZK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs LCID Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, LCID has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while LCID trades at $2.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LCID's P/E ratio is -1.81. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LCID's ROE of -0.69%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to LCID. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs PSNY Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, PSNY has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while PSNY trades at $1.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PSNY's P/E ratio is -1.11. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to PSNY's ROE of +1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to PSNY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs LOT Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, LOT has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while LOT trades at $2.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LOT's P/E ratio is -1.28. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LOT's ROE of +3.21%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to LOT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs BLBD Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, BLBD has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while BLBD trades at $41.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BLBD's P/E ratio is 12.91. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to BLBD's ROE of +0.65%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to BLBD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs LVWR Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, LVWR has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while LVWR trades at $5.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LVWR's P/E ratio is -11.93. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LVWR's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to LVWR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs NAKD Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, NAKD has a market cap of 682M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while NAKD trades at $2.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NAKD's P/E ratio is -0.96. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to NAKD's ROE of -0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to NAKD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs VFSWW Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, VFSWW has a market cap of 657M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while VFSWW trades at $0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VFSWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to VFSWW's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to VFSWW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs PSNYW Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, PSNYW has a market cap of 314M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while PSNYW trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PSNYW's P/E ratio is -0.15. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to PSNYW's ROE of +1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to PSNYW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs NIU Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, NIU has a market cap of 262M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while NIU trades at $3.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NIU's P/E ratio is -10.84. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to NIU's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to NIU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs FFAI Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, FFAI has a market cap of 164M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while FFAI trades at $1.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FFAI's P/E ratio is 0.26. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FFAI's ROE of -2.27%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to FFAI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs FFIEW Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, FFIEW has a market cap of 105.8M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while FFIEW trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FFIEW's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FFIEW's ROE of -2.27%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to FFIEW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs FFIE Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, FFIE has a market cap of 105.8M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while FFIE trades at $1.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FFIE's P/E ratio is 0.00. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FFIE's ROE of -2.27%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to FFIE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs LOTWW Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, LOTWW has a market cap of 67.7M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while LOTWW trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LOTWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LOTWW's ROE of +3.21%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to LOTWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs FSR Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, FSR has a market cap of 52.8M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while FSR trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FSR's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FSR's ROE of -2.72%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to FSR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs CJET Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, CJET has a market cap of 49.7M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while CJET trades at $1.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CJET's P/E ratio is -0.20. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to CJET's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to CJET. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs FLYE Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, FLYE has a market cap of 38.8M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while FLYE trades at $0.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FLYE's P/E ratio is -12.17. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FLYE's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to FLYE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs CENN Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, CENN has a market cap of 29M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while CENN trades at $0.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CENN's P/E ratio is -0.94. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to CENN's ROE of -0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to CENN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs SOLO Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, SOLO has a market cap of 25.4M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while SOLO trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SOLO's P/E ratio is -0.44. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to SOLO's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to SOLO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs RIDE Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, RIDE has a market cap of 21.6M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while RIDE trades at $2.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RIDE's P/E ratio is -0.11. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to RIDE's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to RIDE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs GP Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, GP has a market cap of 11.7M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while GP trades at $0.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GP's P/E ratio is -0.48. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to GP's ROE of -3.24%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to GP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs ECDA Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, ECDA has a market cap of 11M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while ECDA trades at $0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ECDA's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ECDA's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to ECDA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs PEV Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, PEV has a market cap of 10.6M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while PEV trades at $0.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PEV's P/E ratio is -1.21. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to PEV's ROE of -1.18%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to PEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs WKHS Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, WKHS has a market cap of 9.6M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while WKHS trades at $1.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas WKHS's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to WKHS's ROE of -2.05%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to WKHS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs ARVL Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, ARVL has a market cap of 9M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while ARVL trades at $0.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ARVL's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ARVL's ROE of -1.77%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to ARVL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs SVMH Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, SVMH has a market cap of 8M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while SVMH trades at $0.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SVMH's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to SVMH's ROE of +43.14%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to SVMH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs AIEV Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, AIEV has a market cap of 5.6M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while AIEV trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AIEV's P/E ratio is -1.37. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to AIEV's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to AIEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs GOEV Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, GOEV has a market cap of 5.4M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while GOEV trades at $0.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GOEV's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to GOEV's ROE of -0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to GOEV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs LOBO Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, LOBO has a market cap of 5.2M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while LOBO trades at $0.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LOBO's P/E ratio is -5.51. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LOBO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to LOBO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs HYZN Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, HYZN has a market cap of 5M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while HYZN trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HYZN's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to HYZN's ROE of -2.38%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to HYZN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs EVTV Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, EVTV has a market cap of 4.3M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while EVTV trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas EVTV's P/E ratio is -0.19. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to EVTV's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to EVTV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs DMN Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, DMN has a market cap of 4.2M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while DMN trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DMN's P/E ratio is 0.00. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to DMN's ROE of -48.65%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to DMN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs AYRO Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, AYRO has a market cap of 3.5M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while AYRO trades at $0.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AYRO's P/E ratio is -0.54. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to AYRO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to AYRO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs FFAIW Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, FFAIW has a market cap of 3.3M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while FFAIW trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FFAIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FFAIW's ROE of -2.27%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to FFAIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs EGOX Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, EGOX has a market cap of 2.9M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while EGOX trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas EGOX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to EGOX's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to EGOX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs VLCN Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, VLCN has a market cap of 2.9M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while VLCN trades at $5.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VLCN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to VLCN's ROE of -2.95%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to VLCN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs VEV Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, VEV has a market cap of 2.5M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while VEV trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VEV's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to VEV's ROE of -0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to VEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs MULN Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, MULN has a market cap of 1.7M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while MULN trades at $2.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MULN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to MULN's ROE of +1271.16%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to MULN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs ZAPP Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, ZAPP has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while ZAPP trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ZAPP's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ZAPP's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to ZAPP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs GOEVW Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, GOEVW has a market cap of 365.7K. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while GOEVW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GOEVW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to GOEVW's ROE of -0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to GOEVW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs PTRA Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, PTRA has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while PTRA trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PTRA's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to PTRA's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to PTRA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs ELMS Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, ELMS has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while ELMS trades at $0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ELMS's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ELMS's ROE of -0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to ELMS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs SEV Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, SEV has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while SEV trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SEV's P/E ratio is -0.14. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to SEV's ROE of -5.71%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to SEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs SOLOW Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, SOLOW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while SOLOW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SOLOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to SOLOW's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to SOLOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs ADOM Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, ADOM has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while ADOM trades at $0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ADOM's P/E ratio is -35.00. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ADOM's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is less volatile compared to ADOM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.
ECDAW vs TTM Comparison
ECDAW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, ECDAW stands at 523.7K. In comparison, TTM has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, ECDAW is priced at $0.01, while TTM trades at $25.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
ECDAW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TTM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, ECDAW's ROE is +0.48%, compared to TTM's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, ECDAW is more volatile compared to TTM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for ECDAW.