FAT Brands Inc.
FAT Brands Inc. FAT Peers
See (FAT) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Restaurants Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAT | $2.52 | -1.18% | 45.16M | -0.21 | -$11.96 | +113.43% |
| MCD | $321.31 | +0.85% | 229.75B | 28.33 | $11.34 | +2.15% |
| SBUX | $84.61 | -1.12% | 96.15B | 30.77 | $2.75 | +2.84% |
| CMG | $52.28 | -0.09% | 70.43B | 46.26 | $1.13 | N/A |
| YUM | $149.64 | +1.06% | 41.59B | 29.81 | $5.02 | +1.82% |
| DRI | $208.68 | -1.40% | 24.42B | 23.47 | $8.89 | +2.69% |
| QSR | $71.36 | +1.05% | 23.38B | 24.19 | $2.95 | +3.32% |
| DPZ | $497.52 | +0.50% | 17.04B | 28.54 | $17.43 | +1.26% |
| YUMC | $44.63 | +0.95% | 16.66B | 18.67 | $2.39 | +1.62% |
| TXRH | $193.53 | +0.32% | 12.84B | 29.87 | $6.48 | +1.30% |
Stock Comparison
FAT vs MCD Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, MCD has a market cap of 229.75B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while MCD trades at $321.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas MCD's P/E ratio is 28.33. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to MCD's ROE of -1.75%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to MCD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs SBUX Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, SBUX has a market cap of 96.15B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while SBUX trades at $84.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas SBUX's P/E ratio is 30.77. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to SBUX's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to SBUX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs CMG Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, CMG has a market cap of 70.43B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while CMG trades at $52.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas CMG's P/E ratio is 46.26. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to CMG's ROE of +0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to CMG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs YUM Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, YUM has a market cap of 41.59B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while YUM trades at $149.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas YUM's P/E ratio is 29.81. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to YUM's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to YUM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs DRI Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, DRI has a market cap of 24.42B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while DRI trades at $208.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas DRI's P/E ratio is 23.47. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to DRI's ROE of +0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to DRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs QSR Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, QSR has a market cap of 23.38B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while QSR trades at $71.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas QSR's P/E ratio is 24.19. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to QSR's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to QSR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs DPZ Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, DPZ has a market cap of 17.04B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while DPZ trades at $497.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas DPZ's P/E ratio is 28.54. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to DPZ's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to DPZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs YUMC Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, YUMC has a market cap of 16.66B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while YUMC trades at $44.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas YUMC's P/E ratio is 18.67. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to YUMC's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to YUMC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs TXRH Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, TXRH has a market cap of 12.84B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while TXRH trades at $193.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas TXRH's P/E ratio is 29.87. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to TXRH's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to TXRH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BROS Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BROS has a market cap of 11.80B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BROS trades at $71.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BROS's P/E ratio is 184.28. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BROS's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to BROS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs CAVA Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, CAVA has a market cap of 10.42B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while CAVA trades at $90.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas CAVA's P/E ratio is 75.07. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to CAVA's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to CAVA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs WING Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, WING has a market cap of 9.31B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while WING trades at $333.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas WING's P/E ratio is 55.89. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to WING's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to WING. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs EAT Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, EAT has a market cap of 6.62B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while EAT trades at $148.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas EAT's P/E ratio is 20.71. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to EAT's ROE of +3.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to EAT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs SHAK Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, SHAK has a market cap of 4.72B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while SHAK trades at $117.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas SHAK's P/E ratio is 404.79. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to SHAK's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to SHAK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs CAKE Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, CAKE has a market cap of 2.70B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while CAKE trades at $54.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas CAKE's P/E ratio is 17.10. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to CAKE's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to CAKE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs WEN Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, WEN has a market cap of 2.37B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while WEN trades at $12.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas WEN's P/E ratio is 13.13. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to WEN's ROE of +0.83%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to WEN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs SG Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, SG has a market cap of 1.68B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while SG trades at $14.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas SG's P/E ratio is -18.51. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to SG's ROE of -0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to SG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs ARCO Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, ARCO has a market cap of 1.61B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while ARCO trades at $7.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas ARCO's P/E ratio is 11.97. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to ARCO's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to ARCO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs HDL Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, HDL has a market cap of 1.49B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while HDL trades at $22.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas HDL's P/E ratio is 57.13. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to HDL's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to HDL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs PZZA Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, PZZA has a market cap of 1.35B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while PZZA trades at $41.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas PZZA's P/E ratio is 17.41. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to PZZA's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to PZZA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs CBRL Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, CBRL has a market cap of 1.24B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while CBRL trades at $55.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas CBRL's P/E ratio is 34.71. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to CBRL's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to CBRL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs CNNE Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, CNNE has a market cap of 1.15B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while CNNE trades at $18.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas CNNE's P/E ratio is -4.27. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to CNNE's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to CNNE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs FWRG Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, FWRG has a market cap of 1.02B. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while FWRG trades at $16.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas FWRG's P/E ratio is 98.29. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to FWRG's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to FWRG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BJRI Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BJRI has a market cap of 947.00M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BJRI trades at $42.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BJRI's P/E ratio is 44.60. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BJRI's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to BJRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs TWNPV Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, TWNPV has a market cap of 857.88M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while TWNPV trades at $17.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas TWNPV's P/E ratio is -36.38. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to TWNPV's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to TWNPV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs PTLO Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, PTLO has a market cap of 829.23M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while PTLO trades at $12.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas PTLO's P/E ratio is 30.09. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to PTLO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to PTLO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs KRUS Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, KRUS has a market cap of 801.63M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while KRUS trades at $66.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas KRUS's P/E ratio is -72.10. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to KRUS's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to KRUS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BH-A Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BH-A has a market cap of 760.54M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BH-A trades at $1,203.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BH-A's P/E ratio is -5.49. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BH-A's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to BH-A. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BH Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BH has a market cap of 745.72M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BH trades at $242.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BH's P/E ratio is -5.53. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BH's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to BH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BLMN Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BLMN has a market cap of 714.52M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BLMN trades at $8.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BLMN's P/E ratio is 9.44. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BLMN's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to BLMN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs RUTH Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, RUTH has a market cap of 690.54M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while RUTH trades at $21.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas RUTH's P/E ratio is 18.06. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to RUTH's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to RUTH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs CHUY Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, CHUY has a market cap of 645.87M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while CHUY trades at $37.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas CHUY's P/E ratio is 24.18. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to CHUY's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to CHUY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs TAST Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, TAST has a market cap of 502.01M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while TAST trades at $9.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas TAST's P/E ratio is 16.45. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to TAST's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to TAST. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs NATH Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, NATH has a market cap of 434.51M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while NATH trades at $106.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas NATH's P/E ratio is 18.32. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to NATH's ROE of -0.96%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to NATH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs JACK Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, JACK has a market cap of 414.78M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while JACK trades at $21.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas JACK's P/E ratio is -2.04. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to JACK's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to JACK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs DIN Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, DIN has a market cap of 379.08M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while DIN trades at $24.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas DIN's P/E ratio is 6.70. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to DIN's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to DIN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs RICK Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, RICK has a market cap of 371.02M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while RICK trades at $42.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas RICK's P/E ratio is 49.03. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to RICK's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to RICK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs VENU Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, VENU has a market cap of 352.88M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while VENU trades at $9.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas VENU's P/E ratio is -10.94. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to VENU's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to VENU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs PBPB Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, PBPB has a market cap of 307.15M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while PBPB trades at $10.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas PBPB's P/E ratio is 7.27. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to PBPB's ROE of +0.79%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to PBPB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs LOCO Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, LOCO has a market cap of 279.18M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while LOCO trades at $9.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas LOCO's P/E ratio is 10.80. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to LOCO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to LOCO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs TWNP Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, TWNP has a market cap of 272.41M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while TWNP trades at $5.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas TWNP's P/E ratio is -5.32. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to TWNP's ROE of +0.67%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to TWNP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs FRGI Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, FRGI has a market cap of 222.48M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while FRGI trades at $8.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas FRGI's P/E ratio is -33.98. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to FRGI's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to FRGI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs DENN Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, DENN has a market cap of 205.52M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while DENN trades at $4.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas DENN's P/E ratio is 12.15. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to DENN's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to DENN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BBQ Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BBQ has a market cap of 185.50M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BBQ trades at $17.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BBQ's P/E ratio is 15.53. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BBQ's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to BBQ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs STKS Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, STKS has a market cap of 132.88M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while STKS trades at $4.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas STKS's P/E ratio is -3.41. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to STKS's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to STKS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs THCHW Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, THCHW has a market cap of 99.58M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while THCHW trades at $0.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas THCHW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to THCHW's ROE of +1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to THCHW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs THCH Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, THCH has a market cap of 94.27M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while THCH trades at $2.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas THCH's P/E ratio is -1.43. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to THCH's ROE of +1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to THCH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs MB Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, MB has a market cap of 69.44M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while MB trades at $4.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas MB's P/E ratio is 9.08. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to MB's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to MB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs RRGB Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, RRGB has a market cap of 54.27M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while RRGB trades at $3.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas RRGB's P/E ratio is -0.62. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to RRGB's ROE of +1.53%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to RRGB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs GRIL Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, GRIL has a market cap of 54.19M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while GRIL trades at $1.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas GRIL's P/E ratio is -5.28. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to GRIL's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to GRIL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs FATAV Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, FATAV has a market cap of 54.16M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while FATAV trades at $3.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas FATAV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to FATAV's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to FATAV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs FATBB Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, FATBB has a market cap of 45.85M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while FATBB trades at $2.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas FATBB's P/E ratio is -0.23. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to FATBB's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to FATBB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs FATBP Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, FATBP has a market cap of 44.00M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while FATBP trades at $3.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas FATBP's P/E ratio is -1.06. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to FATBP's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to FATBP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs ARKR Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, ARKR has a market cap of 43.89M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while ARKR trades at $12.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas ARKR's P/E ratio is -4.43. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to ARKR's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to ARKR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BDL Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BDL has a market cap of 41.86M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BDL trades at $22.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BDL's P/E ratio is 12.65. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BDL's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to BDL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs FATBW Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, FATBW has a market cap of 41.55M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while FATBW trades at $4.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas FATBW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to FATBW's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to FATBW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs RAVE Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, RAVE has a market cap of 39.93M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while RAVE trades at $2.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas RAVE's P/E ratio is 14.79. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to RAVE's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to RAVE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs NDLS Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, NDLS has a market cap of 39.24M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while NDLS trades at $0.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas NDLS's P/E ratio is -0.99. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to NDLS's ROE of +5.88%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to NDLS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs YOSH Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, YOSH has a market cap of 23.25M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while YOSH trades at $13.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas YOSH's P/E ratio is -6.11. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to YOSH's ROE of -2.71%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to YOSH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs MYT Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, MYT has a market cap of 22.41M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while MYT trades at $2.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas MYT's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to MYT's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to MYT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs GENK Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, GENK has a market cap of 20.46M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while GENK trades at $4.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas GENK's P/E ratio is 31.23. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to GENK's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to GENK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs GTIM Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, GTIM has a market cap of 16.94M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while GTIM trades at $1.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas GTIM's P/E ratio is 17.78. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to GTIM's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to GTIM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs PC Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, PC has a market cap of 15.22M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while PC trades at $0.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas PC's P/E ratio is -19.03. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to PC's ROE of +2.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to PC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs CHSN Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, CHSN has a market cap of 14.98M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while CHSN trades at $0.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas CHSN's P/E ratio is 10.97. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to CHSN's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to CHSN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs REBN Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, REBN has a market cap of 13.07M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while REBN trades at $2.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas REBN's P/E ratio is -1.72. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to REBN's ROE of -1.85%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to REBN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BTBD Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BTBD has a market cap of 7.32M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BTBD trades at $1.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BTBD's P/E ratio is -3.22. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BTBD's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to BTBD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BTB Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BTB has a market cap of 6.22M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BTB trades at $0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BTB's P/E ratio is -0.19. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BTB's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to BTB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs FATBV Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, FATBV has a market cap of 6.07M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while FATBV trades at $4.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas FATBV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to FATBV's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to FATBV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BTBDW Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BTBDW has a market cap of 4.49M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BTBDW trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BTBDW's P/E ratio is 0.26. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BTBDW's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to BTBDW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs PNST Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, PNST has a market cap of 2.47M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while PNST trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas PNST's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to PNST's ROE of +0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to PNST. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BFI Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BFI has a market cap of 2.27M. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BFI trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BFI's P/E ratio is -0.08. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BFI's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to BFI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs BFIIW Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, BFIIW has a market cap of 242318.00. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while BFIIW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas BFIIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to BFIIW's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is less volatile compared to BFIIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.
FAT vs ONDR Comparison
FAT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FAT stands at 45.16M. In comparison, ONDR has a market cap of 81.00. Regarding current trading prices, FAT is priced at $2.52, while ONDR trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FAT currently has a P/E ratio of -0.21, whereas ONDR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FAT's ROE is +0.37%, compared to ONDR's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FAT is more volatile compared to ONDR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FAT.