FGI Industries Ltd.
FGI Industries Ltd. FGIWW Peers
See (FGIWW) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Furnishings, Fixtures & Appliances Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FGIWW | $0.05 | +0.00% | 431.6K | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| SN | $106.36 | +0.00% | 15.1B | 33.94 | $3.16 | N/A |
| TPX | $65.81 | +1.04% | 13.7B | 30.05 | $2.19 | +0.82% |
| MHK | $111.29 | +0.00% | 6.9B | 14.49 | $7.65 | N/A |
| WHR | $110.59 | +0.00% | 6.1B | 845.62 | $0.13 | +6.37% |
| PATK | $99.11 | +0.00% | 3.3B | 23.67 | $4.16 | +1.98% |
| LZB | $39.42 | +0.00% | 1.6B | 16.84 | $2.35 | +2.17% |
| MBC | $11.82 | +0.00% | 1.5B | 15.06 | $0.77 | N/A |
| MLKN | $21.07 | +0.00% | 1.4B | -39.28 | -$0.54 | +3.54% |
| LEG | $9.93 | +0.00% | 1.3B | -2.64 | -$3.74 | +2.02% |
Stock Comparison
FGIWW vs SN Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, SN has a market cap of 15.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while SN trades at $106.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SN's P/E ratio is 33.94. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to SN's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW and SN have similar daily volatility (8.33).
FGIWW vs TPX Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, TPX has a market cap of 13.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while TPX trades at $65.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TPX's P/E ratio is 30.05. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to TPX's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to TPX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs MHK Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, MHK has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while MHK trades at $111.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MHK's P/E ratio is 14.49. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to MHK's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to MHK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs WHR Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, WHR has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while WHR trades at $110.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas WHR's P/E ratio is 845.62. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to WHR's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to WHR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs PATK Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, PATK has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while PATK trades at $99.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PATK's P/E ratio is 23.67. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to PATK's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to PATK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs LZB Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, LZB has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while LZB trades at $39.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LZB's P/E ratio is 16.84. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to LZB's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to LZB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs MBC Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, MBC has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while MBC trades at $11.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MBC's P/E ratio is 15.06. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to MBC's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to MBC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs MLKN Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, MLKN has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while MLKN trades at $21.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MLKN's P/E ratio is -39.28. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to MLKN's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to MLKN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs LEG Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, LEG has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while LEG trades at $9.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LEG's P/E ratio is -2.64. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to LEG's ROE of -0.72%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to LEG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs TILE Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, TILE has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while TILE trades at $21.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TILE's P/E ratio is 15.16. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to TILE's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to TILE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs AMWD Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, AMWD has a market cap of 839.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while AMWD trades at $56.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AMWD's P/E ratio is 8.71. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to AMWD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to AMWD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs ETD Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, ETD has a market cap of 766.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while ETD trades at $30.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ETD's P/E ratio is 13.39. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to ETD's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to ETD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs LOVE Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, LOVE has a market cap of 280.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while LOVE trades at $19.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LOVE's P/E ratio is 24.44. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to LOVE's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to LOVE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs HBB Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, HBB has a market cap of 257.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while HBB trades at $18.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HBB's P/E ratio is 7.81. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to HBB's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to HBB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs COOK Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, COOK has a market cap of 252.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while COOK trades at $1.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas COOK's P/E ratio is -7.75. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to COOK's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to COOK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs FLXS Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, FLXS has a market cap of 206.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while FLXS trades at $38.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FLXS's P/E ratio is 15.27. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to FLXS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to FLXS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs SNBR Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, SNBR has a market cap of 172.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while SNBR trades at $7.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SNBR's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to SNBR's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is less volatile compared to SNBR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs KEQU Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, KEQU has a market cap of 168M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while KEQU trades at $57.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas KEQU's P/E ratio is 15.37. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to KEQU's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to KEQU. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs BSET Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, BSET has a market cap of 140.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while BSET trades at $15.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BSET's P/E ratio is -21.18. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to BSET's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to BSET. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs VIRC Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, VIRC has a market cap of 130.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while VIRC trades at $8.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VIRC's P/E ratio is 6.69. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to VIRC's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to VIRC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs HOFT Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, HOFT has a market cap of 123.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while HOFT trades at $11.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HOFT's P/E ratio is -10.57. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to HOFT's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to HOFT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs LCUT Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, LCUT has a market cap of 121.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while LCUT trades at $5.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LCUT's P/E ratio is -8.90. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to LCUT's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to LCUT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs VIOT Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, VIOT has a market cap of 113.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while VIOT trades at $1.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VIOT's P/E ratio is 5.72. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to VIOT's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is less volatile compared to VIOT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs IRBT Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, IRBT has a market cap of 104.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while IRBT trades at $3.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IRBT's P/E ratio is -0.42. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to IRBT's ROE of -2.68%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to IRBT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs PRPL Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, PRPL has a market cap of 82.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while PRPL trades at $0.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PRPL's P/E ratio is -1.23. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to PRPL's ROE of -2.31%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to PRPL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs NTZ Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, NTZ has a market cap of 38M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while NTZ trades at $3.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NTZ's P/E ratio is -2.14. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to NTZ's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to NTZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs CRWS Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, CRWS has a market cap of 31.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while CRWS trades at $2.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CRWS's P/E ratio is -3.28. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to CRWS's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to CRWS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs NVFY Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, NVFY has a market cap of 18.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while NVFY trades at $1.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NVFY's P/E ratio is -1.58. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to NVFY's ROE of -1.96%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is less volatile compared to NVFY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs NCL Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, NCL has a market cap of 15.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while NCL trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NCL's P/E ratio is -0.78. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to NCL's ROE of -4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to NCL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs ATER Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, ATER has a market cap of 13.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while ATER trades at $1.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ATER's P/E ratio is -1.06. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to ATER's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to ATER. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs EFOI Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, EFOI has a market cap of 12.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while EFOI trades at $2.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas EFOI's P/E ratio is -8.21. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to EFOI's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to EFOI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs FGI Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, FGI has a market cap of 6.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while FGI trades at $0.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FGI's P/E ratio is -4.44. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to FGI's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is less volatile compared to FGI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs AUVI Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, AUVI has a market cap of 1.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while AUVI trades at $0.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AUVI's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to AUVI's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to AUVI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs AUVIP Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, AUVIP has a market cap of 1.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while AUVIP trades at $0.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AUVIP's P/E ratio is -0.90. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to AUVIP's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is less volatile compared to AUVIP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs WEBR Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, WEBR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while WEBR trades at $8.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas WEBR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to WEBR's ROE of +7.54%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to WEBR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.
FGIWW vs KBAL Comparison
FGIWW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FGIWW stands at 431.6K. In comparison, KBAL has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, FGIWW is priced at $0.05, while KBAL trades at $12.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FGIWW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas KBAL's P/E ratio is -23.21. In terms of profitability, FGIWW's ROE is -0.06%, compared to KBAL's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FGIWW is more volatile compared to KBAL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FGIWW.