Canamera Energy Metals Corp.
Canamera Energy Metals Corp. (EMET.CN) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (EMET.CN) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Industrial Materials Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EMET.CN | CA$0.25 | -16.67% | 9.9M | -30.00 | -CA$0.01 | N/A |
| TECK-B.TO | CA$46.00 | +0.88% | 22B | 101.00 | CA$0.45 | +2.19% |
| TECK-A.TO | CA$46.00 | +0.00% | 22B | 100.98 | CA$0.45 | +2.17% |
| IVN.TO | CA$11.26 | -1.05% | 15.8B | 29.13 | CA$0.40 | N/A |
| AKE.TO | CA$8.86 | -0.56% | 5.7B | 9.53 | CA$0.93 | N/A |
| NGEX.TO | CA$21.07 | -1.36% | 4.5B | -55.97 | -CA$0.39 | N/A |
| FIL.TO | CA$32.25 | -1.01% | 4.4B | -31.01 | -CA$1.04 | N/A |
| SKE.TO | CA$21.50 | -0.78% | 2.4B | -13.24 | -CA$1.59 | N/A |
| VZLA.TO | CA$4.50 | -1.10% | 1.6B | -151.00 | -CA$0.03 | N/A |
| FOM.TO | CA$2.66 | +0.00% | 1.4B | -55.20 | -CA$0.05 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
EMET.CN vs TECK-B.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TECK-B.TO has a market cap of 22B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TECK-B.TO trades at CA$46.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TECK-B.TO's P/E ratio is 101.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TECK-B.TO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and TECK-B.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TECK-B.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs TECK-A.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TECK-A.TO has a market cap of 22B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TECK-A.TO trades at CA$46.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TECK-A.TO's P/E ratio is 100.98. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TECK-A.TO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and TECK-A.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TECK-A.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs IVN.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, IVN.TO has a market cap of 15.8B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while IVN.TO trades at CA$11.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas IVN.TO's P/E ratio is 29.13. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to IVN.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to IVN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check IVN.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs AKE.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, AKE.TO has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while AKE.TO trades at CA$8.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas AKE.TO's P/E ratio is 9.53. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to AKE.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to AKE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check AKE.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs NGEX.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, NGEX.TO has a market cap of 4.5B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while NGEX.TO trades at CA$21.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas NGEX.TO's P/E ratio is -55.97. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to NGEX.TO's ROE of -0.69%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to NGEX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check NGEX.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs FIL.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, FIL.TO has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while FIL.TO trades at CA$32.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas FIL.TO's P/E ratio is -31.01. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to FIL.TO's ROE of -0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to FIL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check FIL.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs SKE.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SKE.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SKE.TO trades at CA$21.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SKE.TO's P/E ratio is -13.24. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SKE.TO's ROE of -1.34%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to SKE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check SKE.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs VZLA.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, VZLA.TO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while VZLA.TO trades at CA$4.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas VZLA.TO's P/E ratio is -151.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to VZLA.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to VZLA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check VZLA.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs FOM.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, FOM.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while FOM.TO trades at CA$2.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas FOM.TO's P/E ratio is -55.20. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to FOM.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to FOM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check FOM.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs ALS.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, ALS.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while ALS.TO trades at CA$29.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas ALS.TO's P/E ratio is 14.02. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to ALS.TO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to ALS.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check ALS.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs AII.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, AII.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while AII.TO trades at CA$5.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas AII.TO's P/E ratio is -22.48. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to AII.TO's ROE of -1.16%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to AII.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check AII.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs USA.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, USA.TO has a market cap of 978.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while USA.TO trades at CA$1.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas USA.TO's P/E ratio is -8.33. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to USA.TO's ROE of -1.04%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to USA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check USA.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs LAC.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LAC.TO has a market cap of 840.6M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LAC.TO trades at CA$3.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LAC.TO's P/E ratio is -12.80. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LAC.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to LAC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check LAC.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs MDI.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, MDI.TO has a market cap of 719.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while MDI.TO trades at CA$8.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas MDI.TO's P/E ratio is 27.47. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to MDI.TO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to MDI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check MDI.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs FVL.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, FVL.TO has a market cap of 687.7M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while FVL.TO trades at CA$1.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas FVL.TO's P/E ratio is -130.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to FVL.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to FVL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check FVL.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs NDM.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, NDM.TO has a market cap of 678.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while NDM.TO trades at CA$1.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas NDM.TO's P/E ratio is -9.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to NDM.TO's ROE of -0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to NDM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check NDM.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs PMET.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, PMET.TO has a market cap of 666.9M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while PMET.TO trades at CA$3.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas PMET.TO's P/E ratio is -102.75. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to PMET.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to PMET.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check PMET.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs LAAC.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LAAC.TO has a market cap of 633.1M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LAAC.TO trades at CA$3.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LAAC.TO's P/E ratio is -39.10. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LAAC.TO's ROE of +1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to LAAC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check LAAC.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs POM.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, POM.TO has a market cap of 552.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while POM.TO trades at CA$2.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas POM.TO's P/E ratio is -10.52. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to POM.TO's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to POM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check POM.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs ETG.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, ETG.TO has a market cap of 441.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while ETG.TO trades at CA$2.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas ETG.TO's P/E ratio is -30.43. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to ETG.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to ETG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check ETG.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs LUCA.V Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LUCA.V has a market cap of 426.9M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LUCA.V trades at CA$1.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LUCA.V's P/E ratio is -16.20. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LUCA.V's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to LUCA.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check LUCA.V's competition here
EMET.CN vs PRYM.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, PRYM.TO has a market cap of 405.7M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while PRYM.TO trades at CA$2.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas PRYM.TO's P/E ratio is -18.69. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to PRYM.TO's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to PRYM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check PRYM.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs SOLG.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SOLG.TO has a market cap of 405.1M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SOLG.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SOLG.TO's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SOLG.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to SOLG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check SOLG.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs SAU.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SAU.TO has a market cap of 389.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SAU.TO trades at CA$0.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SAU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SAU.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to SAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check SAU.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs WRN.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, WRN.TO has a market cap of 352M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while WRN.TO trades at CA$1.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas WRN.TO's P/E ratio is -58.67. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to WRN.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to WRN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check WRN.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs LIRC.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LIRC.TO has a market cap of 347.7M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LIRC.TO trades at CA$6.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LIRC.TO's P/E ratio is -90.14. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LIRC.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to LIRC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check LIRC.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs ERD.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, ERD.TO has a market cap of 343.9M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while ERD.TO trades at CA$0.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas ERD.TO's P/E ratio is -47.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to ERD.TO's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to ERD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check ERD.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs TMQ.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TMQ.TO has a market cap of 341.6M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TMQ.TO trades at CA$2.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TMQ.TO's P/E ratio is -26.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TMQ.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to TMQ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check TMQ.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs TLO.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TLO.TO has a market cap of 333.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TLO.TO trades at CA$0.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TLO.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TLO.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to TLO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check TLO.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs ECOR.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, ECOR.TO has a market cap of 322.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while ECOR.TO trades at CA$1.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas ECOR.TO's P/E ratio is -25.90. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to ECOR.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to ECOR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check ECOR.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs ARA.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, ARA.TO has a market cap of 321.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while ARA.TO trades at CA$1.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas ARA.TO's P/E ratio is -24.33. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to ARA.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to ARA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check ARA.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs MNO.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, MNO.TO has a market cap of 299M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while MNO.TO trades at CA$0.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas MNO.TO's P/E ratio is -10.62. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to MNO.TO's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to MNO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check MNO.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs LIFT.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LIFT.CN has a market cap of 276M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LIFT.CN trades at CA$7.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LIFT.CN's P/E ratio is 50.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LIFT.CN's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to LIFT.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check LIFT.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs TLG.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TLG.TO has a market cap of 269.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TLG.TO trades at CA$0.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TLG.TO's P/E ratio is -6.80. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TLG.TO's ROE of -1.17%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to TLG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check TLG.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs SMT.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SMT.TO has a market cap of 246.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SMT.TO trades at CA$1.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SMT.TO's P/E ratio is 8.14. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SMT.TO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to SMT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check SMT.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs GLO.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, GLO.TO has a market cap of 207.6M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while GLO.TO trades at CA$0.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas GLO.TO's P/E ratio is 30.50. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to GLO.TO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to GLO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check GLO.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs GEO.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, GEO.TO has a market cap of 185.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while GEO.TO trades at CA$3.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas GEO.TO's P/E ratio is 10.65. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to GEO.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to GEO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check GEO.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs VROY.V Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, VROY.V has a market cap of 181.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while VROY.V trades at CA$2.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas VROY.V's P/E ratio is -20.85. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to VROY.V's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to VROY.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check VROY.V's competition here
EMET.CN vs FAR.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, FAR.TO has a market cap of 180.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while FAR.TO trades at CA$1.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas FAR.TO's P/E ratio is 7.04. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to FAR.TO's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to FAR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check FAR.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs TI.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TI.TO has a market cap of 174.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TI.TO trades at CA$1.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TI.TO's P/E ratio is 12.80. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TI.TO's ROE of -10.64%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to TI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check TI.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs MOLY.NE Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, MOLY.NE has a market cap of 155.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while MOLY.NE trades at CA$1.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas MOLY.NE's P/E ratio is -43.33. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to MOLY.NE's ROE of -1.70%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to MOLY.NE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check MOLY.NE's competition here
EMET.CN vs IBAT.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, IBAT.CN has a market cap of 146.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while IBAT.CN trades at CA$0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas IBAT.CN's P/E ratio is -7.14. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to IBAT.CN's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and IBAT.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check IBAT.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs LAM.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LAM.TO has a market cap of 131.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LAM.TO trades at CA$0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LAM.TO's P/E ratio is -25.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LAM.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to LAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check LAM.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs CDPR.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, CDPR.CN has a market cap of 125.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while CDPR.CN trades at CA$0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas CDPR.CN's P/E ratio is -1.59. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to CDPR.CN's ROE of -1.93%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to CDPR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check CDPR.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs NB.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, NB.TO has a market cap of 124.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while NB.TO trades at CA$3.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas NB.TO's P/E ratio is -1.94. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to NB.TO's ROE of +1.72%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to NB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check NB.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs FURY.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, FURY.TO has a market cap of 112.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while FURY.TO trades at CA$0.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas FURY.TO's P/E ratio is -0.95. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to FURY.TO's ROE of -0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to FURY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check FURY.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs LGO.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LGO.TO has a market cap of 112.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LGO.TO trades at CA$1.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LGO.TO's P/E ratio is -1.77. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LGO.TO's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to LGO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check LGO.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs AMC.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, AMC.TO has a market cap of 106M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while AMC.TO trades at CA$0.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas AMC.TO's P/E ratio is -4.53. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to AMC.TO's ROE of -0.83%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to AMC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check AMC.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs FSY.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, FSY.TO has a market cap of 105.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while FSY.TO trades at CA$0.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas FSY.TO's P/E ratio is -50.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to FSY.TO's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to FSY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check FSY.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs SLR.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SLR.TO has a market cap of 90.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SLR.TO trades at CA$0.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SLR.TO's P/E ratio is -10.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SLR.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and SLR.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SLR.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs AOT.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, AOT.TO has a market cap of 89.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while AOT.TO trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas AOT.TO's P/E ratio is -1.50. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to AOT.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to AOT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check AOT.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs GENM.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, GENM.TO has a market cap of 85.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while GENM.TO trades at CA$0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas GENM.TO's P/E ratio is -3.20. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to GENM.TO's ROE of +0.58%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to GENM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check GENM.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs TSK.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TSK.TO has a market cap of 84.9M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TSK.TO trades at CA$0.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TSK.TO's P/E ratio is -4.21. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TSK.TO's ROE of -12.07%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to TSK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check TSK.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs NEXT.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, NEXT.TO has a market cap of 79.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while NEXT.TO trades at CA$0.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas NEXT.TO's P/E ratio is -4.30. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to NEXT.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to NEXT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check NEXT.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs GMX.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, GMX.TO has a market cap of 74M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while GMX.TO trades at CA$1.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas GMX.TO's P/E ratio is 44.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to GMX.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to GMX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check GMX.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs WM.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, WM.TO has a market cap of 71.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while WM.TO trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas WM.TO's P/E ratio is -6.50. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to WM.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to WM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check WM.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs PM.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, PM.CN has a market cap of 70.7M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while PM.CN trades at CA$0.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas PM.CN's P/E ratio is -16.75. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to PM.CN's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to PM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check PM.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs S.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, S.TO has a market cap of 69.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while S.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas S.TO's P/E ratio is -1.17. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to S.TO's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and S.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check S.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs NCF.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, NCF.TO has a market cap of 62.7M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while NCF.TO trades at CA$0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas NCF.TO's P/E ratio is -10.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to NCF.TO's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to NCF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check NCF.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs NVLH.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, NVLH.CN has a market cap of 62.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while NVLH.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.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas NVLH.CN's P/E ratio is -24.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to NVLH.CN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and NVLH.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NVLH.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs RUA.V Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, RUA.V has a market cap of 57.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while RUA.V trades at CA$0.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas RUA.V's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to RUA.V's ROE of -0.86%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to RUA.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check RUA.V's competition here
EMET.CN vs OGD.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, OGD.TO has a market cap of 56.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while OGD.TO trades at CA$1.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas OGD.TO's P/E ratio is 9.38. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to OGD.TO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to OGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check OGD.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs ARS.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, ARS.CN has a market cap of 53.1M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while ARS.CN trades at CA$0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas ARS.CN's P/E ratio is -14.25. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to ARS.CN's ROE of -0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and ARS.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ARS.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs TOC.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TOC.CN has a market cap of 52M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TOC.CN trades at CA$0.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TOC.CN's P/E ratio is -29.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TOC.CN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to TOC.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check TOC.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs RTG.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, RTG.TO has a market cap of 47.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while RTG.TO trades at CA$0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas RTG.TO's P/E ratio is -2.50. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to RTG.TO's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and RTG.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check RTG.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs MIN.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, MIN.TO has a market cap of 44.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while MIN.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas MIN.TO's P/E ratio is -0.48. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to MIN.TO's ROE of +1.31%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and MIN.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check MIN.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs FT.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, FT.TO has a market cap of 42.9M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while FT.TO trades at CA$0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas FT.TO's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to FT.TO's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to FT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check FT.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs BKI.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, BKI.TO has a market cap of 41.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while BKI.TO trades at CA$0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas BKI.TO's P/E ratio is -13.50. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to BKI.TO's ROE of +1.40%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to BKI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check BKI.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs RUA.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, RUA.CN has a market cap of 40.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while RUA.CN trades at CA$0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas RUA.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to RUA.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to RUA.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check RUA.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs VALU.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, VALU.CN has a market cap of 39.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while VALU.CN trades at CA$0.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas VALU.CN's P/E ratio is -0.23. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to VALU.CN's ROE of +10.59%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and VALU.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check VALU.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs LFLR.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LFLR.CN has a market cap of 38.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LFLR.CN trades at CA$0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LFLR.CN's P/E ratio is -7.12. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LFLR.CN's ROE of -1.21%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to LFLR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check LFLR.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs FOX.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, FOX.CN has a market cap of 35.1M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while FOX.CN trades at CA$0.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas FOX.CN's P/E ratio is -22.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to FOX.CN's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to FOX.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check FOX.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs VOY.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, VOY.CN has a market cap of 27.7M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while VOY.CN trades at CA$0.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas VOY.CN's P/E ratio is 85.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to VOY.CN's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and VOY.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check VOY.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs EGFV.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, EGFV.CN has a market cap of 27.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while EGFV.CN trades at CA$2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas EGFV.CN's P/E ratio is -100.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to EGFV.CN's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and EGFV.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check EGFV.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs AMPS.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, AMPS.CN has a market cap of 26.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while AMPS.CN 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.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas AMPS.CN's P/E ratio is -5.90. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to AMPS.CN's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and AMPS.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check AMPS.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs AVL.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, AVL.TO has a market cap of 25.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while AVL.TO trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas AVL.TO's P/E ratio is -4.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to AVL.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to AVL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check AVL.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs AAN.V Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, AAN.V has a market cap of 24.9M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while AAN.V trades at CA$0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas AAN.V's P/E ratio is -2.44. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to AAN.V's ROE of +1.31%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and AAN.V have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check AAN.V's competition here
EMET.CN vs SX.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SX.CN has a market cap of 21.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SX.CN trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SX.CN's P/E ratio is -3.50. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SX.CN's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to SX.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check SX.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs SAM.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SAM.TO has a market cap of 21.1M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SAM.TO trades at CA$0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SAM.TO's P/E ratio is -6.30. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SAM.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to SAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check SAM.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs MAXX.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, MAXX.CN has a market cap of 21M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while MAXX.CN trades at CA$0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas MAXX.CN's P/E ratio is -1.62. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to MAXX.CN's ROE of -1.17%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to MAXX.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check MAXX.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs URNM.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, URNM.CN has a market cap of 19.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while URNM.CN trades at CA$0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas URNM.CN's P/E ratio is -1.11. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to URNM.CN's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and URNM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check URNM.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs EXN.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, EXN.TO has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while EXN.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas EXN.TO's P/E ratio is -1.93. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to EXN.TO's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to EXN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check EXN.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs LVL.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LVL.CN has a market cap of 18.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LVL.CN trades at CA$0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LVL.CN's P/E ratio is -12.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LVL.CN's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. EMET.CN has daily volatility of 0.00 and LVL.CN has daily volatility of N/A.Check LVL.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs SLV.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SLV.CN has a market cap of 17.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SLV.CN trades at CA$0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SLV.CN's P/E ratio is -10.83. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SLV.CN's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and SLV.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SLV.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs WRX.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, WRX.TO has a market cap of 16.4M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while WRX.TO trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas WRX.TO's P/E ratio is 4.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to WRX.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and WRX.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check WRX.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs SUPR.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SUPR.CN has a market cap of 15.6M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SUPR.CN trades at CA$0.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SUPR.CN's P/E ratio is -12.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SUPR.CN's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and SUPR.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SUPR.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs TICO.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TICO.CN has a market cap of 15M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TICO.CN trades at CA$0.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TICO.CN's P/E ratio is -75.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TICO.CN's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and TICO.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TICO.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs NICO.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, NICO.CN has a market cap of 14.7M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while NICO.CN trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas NICO.CN's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to NICO.CN's ROE of +0.99%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to NICO.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check NICO.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs COSA.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, COSA.CN has a market cap of 14.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while COSA.CN trades at CA$0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas COSA.CN's P/E ratio is -7.75. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to COSA.CN's ROE of -0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to COSA.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check COSA.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs SVB.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SVB.TO has a market cap of 14.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SVB.TO trades at CA$0.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SVB.TO's P/E ratio is -30.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SVB.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to SVB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check SVB.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs ASND.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, ASND.TO has a market cap of 14M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while ASND.TO trades at CA$0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas ASND.TO's P/E ratio is -1.88. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to ASND.TO's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and ASND.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ASND.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs AWLI.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, AWLI.CN has a market cap of 13.7M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while AWLI.CN trades at CA$0.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas AWLI.CN's P/E ratio is -0.99. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to AWLI.CN's ROE of -0.97%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and AWLI.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check AWLI.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs PNRG.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, PNRG.CN has a market cap of 13.6M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while PNRG.CN trades at CA$0.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas PNRG.CN's P/E ratio is -0.29. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to PNRG.CN's ROE of -1.58%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and PNRG.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check PNRG.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs TTX.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TTX.CN has a market cap of 13.2M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TTX.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.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TTX.CN's P/E ratio is -0.75. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TTX.CN's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and TTX.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TTX.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs SCY.TO Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, SCY.TO has a market cap of 12.5M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while SCY.TO trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas SCY.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to SCY.TO's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to SCY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check SCY.TO's competition here
EMET.CN vs PEK.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, PEK.CN has a market cap of 11.3M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while PEK.CN trades at CA$0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas PEK.CN's P/E ratio is -17.25. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to PEK.CN's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to PEK.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check PEK.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs TN.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, TN.CN has a market cap of 11.1M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while TN.CN trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas TN.CN's P/E ratio is -4.25. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to TN.CN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN is less volatile compared to TN.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for EMET.CN.Check TN.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs NXU.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, NXU.CN has a market cap of 10.8M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while NXU.CN 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.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas NXU.CN's P/E ratio is -15.00. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to NXU.CN's ROE of -16.01%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and NXU.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NXU.CN's competition here
EMET.CN vs LIM.CN Comparison August 2025
EMET.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, EMET.CN stands at 9.9M. In comparison, LIM.CN has a market cap of 9.9M. Regarding current trading prices, EMET.CN is priced at CA$0.25, while LIM.CN trades at CA$0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
EMET.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -30.00, whereas LIM.CN's P/E ratio is 1.50. In terms of profitability, EMET.CN's ROE is -0.32%, compared to LIM.CN's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, EMET.CN and LIM.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check LIM.CN's competition here