Energy Fuels Inc.
Energy Fuels Inc. EFR.TO Peers
See (EFR.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Uranium Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EFR.TO | CA$7.48 | -2.09% | 1.6B | -12.68 | -CA$0.59 | N/A |
| CCO.TO | CA$82.74 | +0.82% | 36B | 145.16 | CA$0.57 | +0.19% |
| U-UN.TO | CA$22.14 | -0.90% | 6B | -3.50 | -CA$6.33 | N/A |
| NXE.TO | CA$8.75 | +1.39% | 5B | -51.47 | -CA$0.17 | N/A |
| DML.TO | CA$2.28 | +2.70% | 2B | -17.54 | -CA$0.13 | N/A |
| FCU.TO | CA$0.72 | -2.70% | 618.3M | -72.00 | -CA$0.01 | N/A |
| URC.TO | CA$3.20 | +2.56% | 427.6M | 80.00 | CA$0.04 | N/A |
| URE.TO | CA$1.17 | +3.54% | 426.8M | -6.50 | -CA$0.18 | N/A |
| MGA.TO | CA$0.30 | +3.45% | 112.5M | -6.00 | -CA$0.05 | N/A |
| WUC.CN | CA$1.10 | -3.51% | 65.3M | -4.40 | -CA$0.25 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
EFR.TO vs CCO.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, CCO.TO has a market cap of 36B. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while CCO.TO trades at CA$82.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas CCO.TO's P/E ratio is 145.16. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to CCO.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to CCO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs U-UN.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, U-UN.TO has a market cap of 6B. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while U-UN.TO trades at CA$22.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas U-UN.TO's P/E ratio is -3.50. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to U-UN.TO's ROE of +0.82%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to U-UN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs NXE.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, NXE.TO has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while NXE.TO trades at CA$8.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas NXE.TO's P/E ratio is -51.47. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to NXE.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to NXE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs DML.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, DML.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while DML.TO trades at CA$2.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas DML.TO's P/E ratio is -17.54. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to DML.TO's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to DML.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs FCU.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, FCU.TO has a market cap of 618.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while FCU.TO trades at CA$0.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas FCU.TO's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to FCU.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to FCU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs URC.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, URC.TO has a market cap of 427.6M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while URC.TO trades at CA$3.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas URC.TO's P/E ratio is 80.00. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to URC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to URC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs URE.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, URE.TO has a market cap of 426.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while URE.TO trades at CA$1.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas URE.TO's P/E ratio is -6.50. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to URE.TO's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to URE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs MGA.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, MGA.TO has a market cap of 112.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while MGA.TO trades at CA$0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas MGA.TO's P/E ratio is -6.00. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to MGA.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to MGA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs WUC.CN Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, WUC.CN has a market cap of 65.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while WUC.CN trades at CA$1.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas WUC.CN's P/E ratio is -4.40. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to WUC.CN's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to WUC.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs LUR.CN Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, LUR.CN has a market cap of 55.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while LUR.CN trades at CA$0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas LUR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.75. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to LUR.CN's ROE of -4.67%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to LUR.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs CAKE.CN Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, CAKE.CN has a market cap of 26.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while CAKE.CN trades at CA$0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas CAKE.CN's P/E ratio is 5.25. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to CAKE.CN's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to CAKE.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs API.CN Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, API.CN has a market cap of 16.1M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while API.CN trades at CA$0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas API.CN's P/E ratio is -10.50. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to API.CN's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to API.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs GREN.CN Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, GREN.CN has a market cap of 6.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while GREN.CN trades at CA$0.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas GREN.CN's P/E ratio is -1.64. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to GREN.CN's ROE of -1.63%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to GREN.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs OBRN.CN Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, OBRN.CN has a market cap of 929K. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while OBRN.CN trades at CA$0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas OBRN.CN's P/E ratio is -1.50. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to OBRN.CN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is less volatile compared to OBRN.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.
EFR.TO vs AZZ.TO Comparison
EFR.TO plays a significant role within the Energy sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EFR.TO stands at 1.6B. In comparison, AZZ.TO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at CA$7.48, while AZZ.TO trades at CA$0.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EFR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -12.68, whereas AZZ.TO's P/E ratio is -15.11. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.17%, compared to AZZ.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is less volatile compared to AZZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EFR.TO.