Flow Beverage Corp.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, COLA.NE has a market cap of 415.12B. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while COLA.NE trades at $24.76.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas COLA.NE's P/E ratio is 27.21. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to COLA.NE's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to COLA.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, PRMW.TO has a market cap of 6.00B. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while PRMW.TO trades at $37.40.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas PRMW.TO's P/E ratio is 52.68. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to PRMW.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to PRMW.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, LAS-A.TO has a market cap of 1.44B. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while LAS-A.TO trades at $215.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas LAS-A.TO's P/E ratio is 12.84. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to LAS-A.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to LAS-A.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, GURU.TO has a market cap of 55.01M. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while GURU.TO trades at $1.81.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas GURU.TO's P/E ratio is -6.24. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to GURU.TO's ROE of -0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to GURU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, WTER.CN has a market cap of 32.63M. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while WTER.CN trades at $0.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas WTER.CN's P/E ratio is -0.65. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to WTER.CN's ROE of -6.88%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to WTER.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, JSDA.CN has a market cap of 27.66M. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while JSDA.CN trades at $0.32.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas JSDA.CN's P/E ratio is -2.67. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to JSDA.CN's ROE of -1.89%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to JSDA.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, BEV.CN has a market cap of 10.89M. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while BEV.CN trades at $0.66.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas BEV.CN's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to BEV.CN's ROE of +11.24%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to BEV.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, NEVI.CN has a market cap of 2.18M. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while NEVI.CN trades at $0.06.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas NEVI.CN's P/E ratio is -5.50. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to NEVI.CN's ROE of -0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to NEVI.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.

FLOW.TO plays a significant role within the Consumer Defensive sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, FLOW.TO stands at 5.63M. In comparison, MILK.CN has a market cap of 1.40M. Regarding current trading prices, FLOW.TO is priced at $0.07, while MILK.CN trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

FLOW.TO currently has a P/E ratio of -0.18, whereas MILK.CN's P/E ratio is -0.80. In terms of profitability, FLOW.TO's ROE is -0.92%, compared to MILK.CN's ROE of -4.78%. Regarding short-term risk, FLOW.TO is more volatile compared to MILK.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLOW.TO.