Flutter Entertainment plc
Flutter Entertainment plc FLUT Peers
See (FLUT) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Gambling, Resorts & Casinos Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLUT | $249.54 | +2.84% | 44.1B | 85.75 | $2.91 | N/A |
| LVS | $40.21 | -0.14% | 28.4B | 22.84 | $1.76 | +2.24% |
| DKNG | $35.81 | +6.17% | 17.8B | -43.67 | -$0.82 | N/A |
| WYNN | $83.30 | +0.07% | 8.7B | 22.27 | $3.74 | +1.20% |
| MGM | $31.84 | +1.74% | 8.7B | 14.21 | $2.24 | N/A |
| LNW | $87.04 | +1.45% | 7.3B | 23.27 | $3.74 | N/A |
| CHDN | $98.08 | +2.12% | 7.1B | 17.06 | $5.75 | +0.42% |
| BYD | $74.10 | +1.13% | 6B | 12.15 | $6.10 | +0.93% |
| MTN | $150.33 | -2.95% | 5.6B | 19.15 | $7.85 | +5.87% |
| CZR | $25.72 | +0.35% | 5.3B | -23.38 | -$1.10 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
FLUT vs LVS Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, LVS has a market cap of 28.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while LVS trades at $40.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas LVS's P/E ratio is 22.84. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to LVS's ROE of +0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to LVS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs DKNG Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, DKNG has a market cap of 17.8B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while DKNG trades at $35.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas DKNG's P/E ratio is -43.67. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to DKNG's ROE of -0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to DKNG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs WYNN Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, WYNN has a market cap of 8.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while WYNN trades at $83.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas WYNN's P/E ratio is 22.27. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to WYNN's ROE of -1.76%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to WYNN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs MGM Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, MGM has a market cap of 8.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while MGM trades at $31.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas MGM's P/E ratio is 14.21. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to MGM's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to MGM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs LNW Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, LNW has a market cap of 7.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while LNW trades at $87.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas LNW's P/E ratio is 23.27. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to LNW's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to LNW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs CHDN Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, CHDN has a market cap of 7.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while CHDN trades at $98.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas CHDN's P/E ratio is 17.06. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to CHDN's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to CHDN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs BYD Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, BYD has a market cap of 6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while BYD trades at $74.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas BYD's P/E ratio is 12.15. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to BYD's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to BYD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs MTN Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, MTN has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while MTN trades at $150.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas MTN's P/E ratio is 19.15. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to MTN's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to MTN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs CZR Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, CZR has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while CZR trades at $25.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas CZR's P/E ratio is -23.38. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to CZR's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to CZR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs SGMS Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, SGMS has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while SGMS trades at $58.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas SGMS's P/E ratio is 30.71. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to SGMS's ROE of +0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to SGMS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs SGHC Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, SGHC has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while SGHC trades at $9.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas SGHC's P/E ratio is 35.44. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to SGHC's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to SGHC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs HGV Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, HGV has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while HGV trades at $40.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas HGV's P/E ratio is 125.44. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to HGV's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to HGV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs RSI Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, RSI has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while RSI trades at $13.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas RSI's P/E ratio is 148.67. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to RSI's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to RSI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs RRR Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, RRR has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while RRR trades at $50.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas RRR's P/E ratio is 19.25. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to RRR's ROE of +0.78%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to RRR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs IGT Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, IGT has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while IGT trades at $14.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas IGT's P/E ratio is 132.55. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to IGT's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to IGT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs SBET Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, SBET has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while SBET trades at $41.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas SBET's P/E ratio is 0.88. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to SBET's ROE of -1.44%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to SBET. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs PENN Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, PENN has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while PENN trades at $15.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas PENN's P/E ratio is -25.56. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to PENN's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to PENN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs VAC Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, VAC has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while VAC trades at $66.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas VAC's P/E ratio is 11.29. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to VAC's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to VAC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs PLYA Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, PLYA has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while PLYA trades at $13.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas PLYA's P/E ratio is 26.42. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to PLYA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to PLYA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs MCRI Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, MCRI has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while MCRI trades at $84.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas MCRI's P/E ratio is 21.32. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to MCRI's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to MCRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs EVRI Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, EVRI has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while EVRI trades at $14.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas EVRI's P/E ratio is 88.59. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to EVRI's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to EVRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs BVH Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, BVH has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while BVH trades at $75.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas BVH's P/E ratio is 20.05. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to BVH's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to BVH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs NGMS Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, NGMS has a market cap of 998.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while NGMS trades at $29.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas NGMS's P/E ratio is -81.81. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to NGMS's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to NGMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs ACEL Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, ACEL has a market cap of 954.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while ACEL trades at $11.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas ACEL's P/E ratio is 23.02. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to ACEL's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to ACEL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs MLCO Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, MLCO has a market cap of 807.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while MLCO trades at $5.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas MLCO's P/E ratio is 42.07. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to MLCO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to MLCO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs GDEN Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, GDEN has a market cap of 715.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while GDEN trades at $27.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas GDEN's P/E ratio is 62.98. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to GDEN's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to GDEN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs TPGH-UN Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, TPGH-UN has a market cap of 580.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while TPGH-UN trades at $11.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas TPGH-UN's P/E ratio is -1000.00. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to TPGH-UN's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to TPGH-UN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs AGS Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, AGS has a market cap of 513.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while AGS trades at $12.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas AGS's P/E ratio is 10.67. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to AGS's ROE of +0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to AGS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs GAMB Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, GAMB has a market cap of 426.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while GAMB trades at $11.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas GAMB's P/E ratio is 12.49. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to GAMB's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to GAMB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs BALY Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, BALY has a market cap of 396.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while BALY trades at $9.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas BALY's P/E ratio is -0.96. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to BALY's ROE of -1.56%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to BALY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs CDROW Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, CDROW has a market cap of 382.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while CDROW trades at $0.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas CDROW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to CDROW's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to CDROW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs CDRO Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, CDRO has a market cap of 339.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while CDRO trades at $7.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas CDRO's P/E ratio is 82.56. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to CDRO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to CDRO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs INSE Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, INSE has a market cap of 217.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while INSE trades at $8.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas INSE's P/E ratio is 3.32. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to INSE's ROE of -1.75%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to INSE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs MSC Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, MSC has a market cap of 133.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while MSC trades at $2.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas MSC's P/E ratio is -5.54. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to MSC's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to MSC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs FLL Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, FLL has a market cap of 113.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while FLL trades at $3.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas FLL's P/E ratio is -2.86. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to FLL's ROE of -0.86%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to FLL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs GAN Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, GAN has a market cap of 91.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while GAN trades at $1.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas GAN's P/E ratio is -8.21. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to GAN's ROE of +0.98%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to GAN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs CPHC Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, CPHC has a market cap of 89.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while CPHC trades at $17.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas CPHC's P/E ratio is 111.19. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to CPHC's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to CPHC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs CNTY Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, CNTY has a market cap of 62.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while CNTY trades at $2.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas CNTY's P/E ratio is -0.46. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to CNTY's ROE of -6.50%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to CNTY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs LTRYW Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, LTRYW has a market cap of 39.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while LTRYW trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas LTRYW's P/E ratio is -0.33. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to LTRYW's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to LTRYW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs LTRY Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, LTRY has a market cap of 36.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while LTRY trades at $1.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas LTRY's P/E ratio is -0.67. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to LTRY's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to LTRY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs SLNA Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, SLNA has a market cap of 16.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while SLNA trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas SLNA's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to SLNA's ROE of +0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to SLNA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs SLNAW Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, SLNAW has a market cap of 526.4K. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while SLNAW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas SLNAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to SLNAW's ROE of +0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to SLNAW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs GMBLZ Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, GMBLZ has a market cap of 270.5K. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while GMBLZ trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas GMBLZ's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to GMBLZ's ROE of +1.62%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to GMBLZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs GMBL Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, GMBL has a market cap of 263.7K. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while GMBL trades at $0.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas GMBL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to GMBL's ROE of +1.62%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to GMBL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs GMBLP Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, GMBLP has a market cap of 70.8K. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while GMBLP trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas GMBLP's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to GMBLP's ROE of +1.62%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to GMBLP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs EBET Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, EBET has a market cap of 10.5K. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while EBET trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas EBET's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to EBET's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to EBET. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs GMBLW Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, GMBLW has a market cap of 1.3K. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while GMBLW trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas GMBLW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to GMBLW's ROE of +1.62%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is more volatile compared to GMBLW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.
FLUT vs GNOG Comparison
FLUT plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLUT stands at 44.1B. In comparison, GNOG has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, FLUT is priced at $249.54, while GNOG trades at $5.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLUT currently has a P/E ratio of 85.75, whereas GNOG's P/E ratio is -3.90. In terms of profitability, FLUT's ROE is +0.06%, compared to GNOG's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, FLUT is less volatile compared to GNOG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLUT.