Energy Fuels Inc.
Energy Fuels Inc. EFR.TO Peers
See (EFR.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
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 1.44B. In comparison, CCO.TO has a market cap of 30.78B. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while CCO.TO trades at $70.71.
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 -17.03, whereas CCO.TO's P/E ratio is 124.05. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 1.44B. In comparison, U-UN.TO has a market cap of 5.88B. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while U-UN.TO trades at $21.79.
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 -17.03, whereas U-UN.TO's P/E ratio is -3.42. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 1.44B. In comparison, NXE.TO has a market cap of 4.54B. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while NXE.TO trades at $7.97.
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 -17.03, whereas NXE.TO's P/E ratio is -56.93. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 1.44B. In comparison, DML.TO has a market cap of 1.94B. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while DML.TO trades at $2.17.
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 -17.03, whereas DML.TO's P/E ratio is -21.70. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 1.44B. In comparison, FCU.TO has a market cap of 618.31M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while FCU.TO trades at $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 -17.03, whereas FCU.TO's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 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 1.44B. In comparison, URE.TO has a market cap of 364.82M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while URE.TO trades at $1.00.
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 -17.03, whereas URE.TO's P/E ratio is -4.17. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, compared to URE.TO's ROE of -0.47%. 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 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 1.44B. In comparison, URC.TO has a market cap of 358.14M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while URC.TO trades at $2.68.
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 -17.03, whereas URC.TO's P/E ratio is 67.00. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 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 1.44B. In comparison, MGA.TO has a market cap of 104.15M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while MGA.TO trades at $0.28.
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 -17.03, whereas MGA.TO's P/E ratio is -9.33. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 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 1.44B. In comparison, LUR.CN has a market cap of 55.47M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while LUR.CN trades at $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 -17.03, whereas LUR.CN's P/E ratio is -0.75. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, compared to LUR.CN's ROE of -7.37%. 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 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 1.44B. In comparison, WUC.CN has a market cap of 52.85M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while WUC.CN trades at $0.89.
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 -17.03, whereas WUC.CN's P/E ratio is -3.56. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 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 1.44B. In comparison, CAKE.CN has a market cap of 26.24M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while CAKE.CN trades at $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 -17.03, whereas CAKE.CN's P/E ratio is 5.25. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 1.44B. In comparison, API.CN has a market cap of 16.06M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while API.CN trades at $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 -17.03, whereas API.CN's P/E ratio is -10.50. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 1.44B. In comparison, GREN.CN has a market cap of 6.41M. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while GREN.CN trades at $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 -17.03, whereas GREN.CN's P/E ratio is -1.64. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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 1.44B. In comparison, OBRN.CN has a market cap of 619326.00. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while OBRN.CN trades at $0.01.
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 -17.03, whereas OBRN.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, compared to OBRN.CN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, EFR.TO is more volatile compared to OBRN.CN. This indicates potentially higher 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 1.44B. In comparison, AZZ.TO comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, EFR.TO is priced at $6.64, while AZZ.TO trades at $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 -17.03, whereas AZZ.TO's P/E ratio is -15.11. In terms of profitability, EFR.TO's ROE is -0.11%, 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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CCO.TO | $70.71 | +3.17% | 30.78B | 124.05 | $0.57 | +0.23% |
| U-UN.TO | $21.79 | -0.91% | 5.88B | -3.42 | -$6.38 | N/A |
| NXE.TO | $7.97 | +3.24% | 4.54B | -56.93 | -$0.14 | N/A |
| DML.TO | $2.17 | +3.33% | 1.94B | -21.70 | -$0.10 | N/A |
| EFR.TO | $6.64 | +0.61% | 1.44B | -17.03 | -$0.39 | N/A |
| FCU.TO | $0.72 | -2.70% | 618.31M | -72.00 | -$0.01 | N/A |
| URE.TO | $1.00 | +2.04% | 364.82M | -4.17 | -$0.24 | N/A |
| URC.TO | $2.68 | +0.37% | 358.14M | 67.00 | $0.04 | N/A |
| MGA.TO | $0.28 | -1.75% | 104.15M | -9.33 | -$0.03 | N/A |
| LUR.CN | $0.24 | +2.13% | 55.47M | -0.75 | -$0.32 | N/A |