Fidelity U.S. Dividend for Rising Rates Index ETF
Fidelity U.S. Dividend for Rising Rates Index ETF FCRR.TO Peers
See (FCRR.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Asset Management Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FCRR.TO | CA$43.12 | +1.27% | 28.7M | 21.73 | CA$1.98 | +1.85% |
| BLK.NE | CA$26.02 | +0.66% | 207.4B | 23.65 | CA$1.10 | N/A |
| BN.TO | CA$80.66 | +1.56% | 132.9B | 201.65 | CA$0.40 | +0.79% |
| BAM.TO | CA$78.79 | +1.84% | 127.1B | 42.13 | CA$1.87 | +2.12% |
| VFV.TO | CA$146.02 | +1.35% | 20.8B | 25.58 | CA$5.71 | +1.05% |
| ZSP.TO | CA$89.99 | +1.24% | 17.5B | N/A | N/A | +0.94% |
| PHYS.TO | CA$34.65 | -1.04% | 16.1B | 3.67 | CA$9.45 | N/A |
| XIU.TO | CA$39.82 | +0.38% | 14B | 21.58 | CA$1.85 | +2.83% |
| XEF.TO | CA$42.69 | +0.54% | 11.4B | 16.77 | CA$2.55 | +2.44% |
| VUN.TO | CA$109.90 | +1.46% | 10.7B | 24.85 | CA$4.42 | +0.97% |
Stock Comparison
FCRR.TO vs BLK.NE Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, BLK.NE has a market cap of 207.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while BLK.NE trades at CA$26.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas BLK.NE's P/E ratio is 23.65. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BLK.NE's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to BLK.NE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs BN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, BN.TO has a market cap of 132.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while BN.TO trades at CA$80.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas BN.TO's P/E ratio is 201.65. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BN.TO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to BN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs BAM.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, BAM.TO has a market cap of 127.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while BAM.TO trades at CA$78.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas BAM.TO's P/E ratio is 42.13. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BAM.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to BAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VFV.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VFV.TO has a market cap of 20.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VFV.TO trades at CA$146.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VFV.TO's P/E ratio is 25.58. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VFV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VFV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZSP.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZSP.TO has a market cap of 17.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZSP.TO trades at CA$89.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZSP.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZSP.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZSP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs PHYS.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, PHYS.TO has a market cap of 16.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while PHYS.TO trades at CA$34.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas PHYS.TO's P/E ratio is 3.67. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PHYS.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to PHYS.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XIU.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XIU.TO has a market cap of 14B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XIU.TO trades at CA$39.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XIU.TO's P/E ratio is 21.58. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XIU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XIU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XEF.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XEF.TO has a market cap of 11.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XEF.TO trades at CA$42.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XEF.TO's P/E ratio is 16.77. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XEF.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XEF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VUN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VUN.TO has a market cap of 10.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VUN.TO trades at CA$109.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VUN.TO's P/E ratio is 24.85. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VUN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VUN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs IGM.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, IGM.TO has a market cap of 10.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while IGM.TO trades at CA$43.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas IGM.TO's P/E ratio is 11.06. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to IGM.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to IGM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZCN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZCN.TO has a market cap of 9.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZCN.TO trades at CA$35.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZCN.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZCN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZCN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZEA.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZEA.TO has a market cap of 9.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZEA.TO trades at CA$25.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZEA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZEA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to ZEA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XIC.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XIC.TO has a market cap of 9.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XIC.TO trades at CA$42.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XIC.TO's P/E ratio is 20.85. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XIC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XIC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs PSLV.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, PSLV.TO has a market cap of 9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while PSLV.TO trades at CA$16.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas PSLV.TO's P/E ratio is 3.94. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PSLV.TO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to PSLV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XSP.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XSP.TO has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XSP.TO trades at CA$62.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XSP.TO's P/E ratio is 26.05. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XSP.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XSP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VCN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VCN.TO has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VCN.TO trades at CA$54.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VCN.TO's P/E ratio is 21.17. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VCN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VCN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XUS.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XUS.TO has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XUS.TO trades at CA$51.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XUS.TO's P/E ratio is 25.91. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XUS.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XUS.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs CEF.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, CEF.TO has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while CEF.TO trades at CA$41.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas CEF.TO's P/E ratio is 21.58. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CEF.TO's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to CEF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ONEX.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ONEX.TO has a market cap of 7.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ONEX.TO trades at CA$106.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ONEX.TO's P/E ratio is 12.40. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ONEX.TO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ONEX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XEQT.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XEQT.TO has a market cap of 7.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XEQT.TO trades at CA$35.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XEQT.TO's P/E ratio is 20.69. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XEQT.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XEQT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VEQT.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VEQT.TO has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VEQT.TO trades at CA$46.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VEQT.TO's P/E ratio is 20.75. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VEQT.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VEQT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs CASH.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, CASH.TO has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while CASH.TO trades at CA$50.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas CASH.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CASH.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to CASH.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VGRO.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VGRO.TO has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VGRO.TO trades at CA$38.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VGRO.TO's P/E ratio is 20.46. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VGRO.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VGRO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs CSAV.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, CSAV.TO has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while CSAV.TO trades at CA$50.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas CSAV.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CSAV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to CSAV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VIU.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VIU.TO has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VIU.TO trades at CA$38.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VIU.TO's P/E ratio is 16.09. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VIU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to VIU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZEB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZEB.TO has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZEB.TO trades at CA$44.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZEB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZEB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZEB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZMMK.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZMMK.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZMMK.TO trades at CA$49.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZMMK.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZMMK.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to ZMMK.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs PSA.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, PSA.TO has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while PSA.TO trades at CA$50.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas PSA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PSA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to PSA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZLB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZLB.TO has a market cap of 4.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZLB.TO trades at CA$52.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZLB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZLB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZLB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs CIX.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, CIX.TO has a market cap of 4.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while CIX.TO trades at CA$31.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas CIX.TO's P/E ratio is -17.04. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CIX.TO's ROE of -0.54%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to CIX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VSP.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VSP.TO has a market cap of 4.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VSP.TO trades at CA$96.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VSP.TO's P/E ratio is 25.71. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VSP.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VSP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZCS.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZCS.TO has a market cap of 4.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZCS.TO trades at CA$13.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZCS.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZCS.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to ZCS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs HXS.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, HXS.TO has a market cap of 4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while HXS.TO trades at CA$84.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas HXS.TO's P/E ratio is 25.93. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HXS.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to HXS.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs HXT.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, HXT.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while HXT.TO trades at CA$69.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas HXT.TO's P/E ratio is 21.70. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HXT.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to HXT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs QUU.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, QUU.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while QUU.TO trades at CA$237.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas QUU.TO's P/E ratio is 26.43. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to QUU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to QUU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VDY.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VDY.TO has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VDY.TO trades at CA$51.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VDY.TO's P/E ratio is 16.34. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VDY.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO and VDY.TO have similar daily volatility (0.33).
FCRR.TO vs XUU.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XUU.TO has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XUU.TO trades at CA$60.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XUU.TO's P/E ratio is 25.20. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XUU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XUU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VBAL.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VBAL.TO has a market cap of 3.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VBAL.TO trades at CA$33.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VBAL.TO's P/E ratio is 20.18. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VBAL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to VBAL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs TPU.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, TPU.TO has a market cap of 3.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while TPU.TO trades at CA$46.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas TPU.TO's P/E ratio is 26.39. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TPU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to TPU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XSEM.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XSEM.TO has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XSEM.TO trades at CA$22.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XSEM.TO's P/E ratio is 14.60. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XSEM.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XSEM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZUE.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZUE.TO has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZUE.TO trades at CA$82.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZUE.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZUE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZUE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XQQ.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XQQ.TO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XQQ.TO trades at CA$54.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XQQ.TO's P/E ratio is 33.16. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XQQ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XQQ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZWB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZWB.TO has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZWB.TO trades at CA$20.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZWB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZWB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to ZWB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XGRO.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XGRO.TO has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XGRO.TO trades at CA$31.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XGRO.TO's P/E ratio is 20.43. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XGRO.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to XGRO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs TTP.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, TTP.TO has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while TTP.TO trades at CA$30.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas TTP.TO's P/E ratio is 20.70. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TTP.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to TTP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XAW.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XAW.TO has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XAW.TO trades at CA$45.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XAW.TO's P/E ratio is 21.00. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XAW.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XAW.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs BBUC.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, BBUC.TO has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while BBUC.TO trades at CA$40.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas BBUC.TO's P/E ratio is -2.70. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BBUC.TO's ROE of -2.92%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to BBUC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs TPE.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, TPE.TO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while TPE.TO trades at CA$24.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas TPE.TO's P/E ratio is 16.72. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TPE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to TPE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XBB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XBB.TO has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XBB.TO trades at CA$28.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XBB.TO's P/E ratio is 11.01. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XBB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XBB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VEE.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VEE.TO has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VEE.TO trades at CA$39.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VEE.TO's P/E ratio is 15.25. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VEE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VEE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VXC.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VXC.TO has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VXC.TO trades at CA$65.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VXC.TO's P/E ratio is 20.65. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VXC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VXC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs NSCE.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, NSCE.TO has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while NSCE.TO trades at CA$48.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas NSCE.TO's P/E ratio is 24.43. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to NSCE.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to NSCE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs PFMN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, PFMN.TO has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while PFMN.TO trades at CA$15.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas PFMN.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PFMN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to PFMN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs SII.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, SII.TO has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while SII.TO trades at CA$84.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas SII.TO's P/E ratio is 32.00. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SII.TO's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to SII.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VCE.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VCE.TO has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VCE.TO trades at CA$58.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VCE.TO's P/E ratio is 21.11. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VCE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VCE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XEC.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XEC.TO has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XEC.TO trades at CA$30.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XEC.TO's P/E ratio is 14.84. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XEC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XEC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XDIV.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XDIV.TO has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XDIV.TO trades at CA$31.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XDIV.TO's P/E ratio is 16.38. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XDIV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XDIV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XCB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XCB.TO has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XCB.TO trades at CA$20.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XCB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XCB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to XCB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZLU.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZLU.TO has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZLU.TO trades at CA$54.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZLU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZLU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZLU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZQQ.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZQQ.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZQQ.TO trades at CA$150.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZQQ.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZQQ.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZQQ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs CMR.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, CMR.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while CMR.TO trades at CA$50.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas CMR.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CMR.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to CMR.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VGG.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VGG.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VGG.TO trades at CA$93.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VGG.TO's P/E ratio is 24.14. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VGG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to VGG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs MNY.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, MNY.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while MNY.TO trades at CA$100.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas MNY.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to MNY.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to MNY.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs HSAV.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, HSAV.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while HSAV.TO trades at CA$115.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas HSAV.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HSAV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to HSAV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XBAL.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XBAL.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XBAL.TO trades at CA$30.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XBAL.TO's P/E ratio is 20.09. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XBAL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to XBAL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs QCN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, QCN.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while QCN.TO trades at CA$161.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas QCN.TO's P/E ratio is 20.69. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to QCN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to QCN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XIN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XIN.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XIN.TO trades at CA$39.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XIN.TO's P/E ratio is 17.02. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XIN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to XIN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XEI.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XEI.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XEI.TO trades at CA$28.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XEI.TO's P/E ratio is 17.03. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XEI.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XEI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XFN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XFN.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XFN.TO trades at CA$63.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XFN.TO's P/E ratio is 16.44. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XFN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XFN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZWU.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZWU.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZWU.TO trades at CA$10.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZWU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZWU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZWU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs FIH-U.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, FIH-U.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while FIH-U.TO trades at CA$17.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas FIH-U.TO's P/E ratio is 59.07. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to FIH-U.TO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to FIH-U.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs QQC.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, QQC.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while QQC.TO trades at CA$35.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas QQC.TO's P/E ratio is 33.07. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to QQC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to QQC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XDV.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XDV.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XDV.TO trades at CA$33.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XDV.TO's P/E ratio is 14.24. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XDV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to XDV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs CYB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, CYB.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while CYB.TO trades at CA$78.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas CYB.TO's P/E ratio is 10.71. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CYB.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to CYB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs CACB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, CACB.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while CACB.TO trades at CA$20.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas CACB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CACB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to CACB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs CBIL.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, CBIL.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while CBIL.TO trades at CA$50.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas CBIL.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CBIL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to CBIL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ISIF.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ISIF.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ISIF.TO trades at CA$12.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ISIF.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ISIF.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to ISIF.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XFH.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XFH.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XFH.TO trades at CA$34.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XFH.TO's P/E ratio is 16.85. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XFH.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to XFH.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZWC.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZWC.TO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZWC.TO trades at CA$18.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZWC.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZWC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO and ZWC.TO have similar daily volatility (0.33).
FCRR.TO vs XSH.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XSH.TO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XSH.TO trades at CA$19.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XSH.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XSH.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to XSH.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XGB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XGB.TO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XGB.TO trades at CA$19.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XGB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XGB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XGB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs UNC.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, UNC.TO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while UNC.TO trades at CA$134.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas UNC.TO's P/E ratio is 6.85. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to UNC.TO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to UNC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZPR.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZPR.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZPR.TO trades at CA$11.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZPR.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZPR.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZPR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs EQL.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, EQL.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while EQL.TO trades at CA$37.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas EQL.TO's P/E ratio is 21.40. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to EQL.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to EQL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZGB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZGB.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZGB.TO trades at CA$45.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZGB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZGB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to ZGB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZEM.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZEM.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZEM.TO trades at CA$22.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZEM.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZEM.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZEM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs HMAX.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, HMAX.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while HMAX.TO trades at CA$14.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas HMAX.TO's P/E ratio is 16.54. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HMAX.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to HMAX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs HXCN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, HXCN.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while HXCN.TO trades at CA$43.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas HXCN.TO's P/E ratio is 20.85. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HXCN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to HXCN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs VSB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, VSB.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while VSB.TO trades at CA$23.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas VSB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VSB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to VSB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs RIIN.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, RIIN.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while RIIN.TO trades at CA$21.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas RIIN.TO's P/E ratio is 20.28. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to RIIN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to RIIN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZUQ.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZUQ.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZUQ.TO trades at CA$87.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZUQ.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZUQ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZUQ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XEG.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XEG.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XEG.TO trades at CA$16.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XEG.TO's P/E ratio is 12.96. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XEG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XEG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs HHL.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, HHL.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while HHL.TO trades at CA$7.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas HHL.TO's P/E ratio is 23.63. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HHL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to HHL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XRE.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XRE.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XRE.TO trades at CA$15.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XRE.TO's P/E ratio is 12.14. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XRE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XRE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs MUB.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, MUB.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while MUB.TO trades at CA$18.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas MUB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to MUB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to MUB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs XWD.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, XWD.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while XWD.TO trades at CA$97.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas XWD.TO's P/E ratio is 22.83. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XWD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to XWD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs FCUV.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, FCUV.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while FCUV.TO trades at CA$19.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas FCUV.TO's P/E ratio is 16.19. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to FCUV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to FCUV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs BND.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, BND.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while BND.TO trades at CA$17.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas BND.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to BND.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is more volatile compared to BND.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.
FCRR.TO vs ZDV.TO Comparison
FCRR.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FCRR.TO stands at 28.7M. In comparison, ZDV.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FCRR.TO is priced at CA$43.12, while ZDV.TO trades at CA$23.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FCRR.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 21.73, whereas ZDV.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FCRR.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZDV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FCRR.TO is less volatile compared to ZDV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FCRR.TO.