1-800-FLOWERS.COM, Inc.
1-800-FLOWERS.COM, Inc. (FLWS) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (FLWS) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Specialty Retail Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLWS | $6.38 | +1.92% | 405.5M | -2.42 | -$2.64 | N/A |
| AMZN | $231.44 | -0.34% | 2.5T | 37.76 | $6.13 | N/A |
| BABA | $120.03 | -0.92% | 286.4B | 13.23 | $9.07 | +1.65% |
| PDD | $118.45 | +0.20% | 164.5B | 12.70 | $9.33 | N/A |
| MELI | $2,362.56 | -1.19% | 119.7B | 58.10 | $40.65 | N/A |
| SE | $157.71 | -0.10% | 93.4B | 110.31 | $1.43 | N/A |
| ORLY | $97.66 | -0.51% | 83.5B | 34.88 | $2.80 | N/A |
| CVNA | $332.12 | +1.85% | 71.1B | 115.68 | $2.87 | N/A |
| AZO | $3,820.91 | -0.54% | 63.9B | 25.90 | $147.51 | N/A |
| CPNG | $30.25 | +0.36% | 54.9B | 216.11 | $0.14 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
FLWS vs AMZN Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, AMZN has a market cap of 2.5T. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while AMZN trades at $231.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas AMZN's P/E ratio is 37.76. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AMZN's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to AMZN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check AMZN's competition here
FLWS vs BABA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BABA has a market cap of 286.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BABA trades at $120.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BABA's P/E ratio is 13.23. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BABA's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to BABA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BABA's competition here
FLWS vs PDD Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, PDD has a market cap of 164.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while PDD trades at $118.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas PDD's P/E ratio is 12.70. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to PDD's ROE of +0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to PDD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check PDD's competition here
FLWS vs MELI Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, MELI has a market cap of 119.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while MELI trades at $2,362.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas MELI's P/E ratio is 58.10. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to MELI's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to MELI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check MELI's competition here
FLWS vs SE Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, SE has a market cap of 93.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while SE trades at $157.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas SE's P/E ratio is 110.31. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SE's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to SE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check SE's competition here
FLWS vs ORLY Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, ORLY has a market cap of 83.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while ORLY trades at $97.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas ORLY's P/E ratio is 34.88. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ORLY's ROE of -1.80%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to ORLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check ORLY's competition here
FLWS vs CVNA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, CVNA has a market cap of 71.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while CVNA trades at $332.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas CVNA's P/E ratio is 115.68. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CVNA's ROE of +0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to CVNA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check CVNA's competition here
FLWS vs AZO Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, AZO has a market cap of 63.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while AZO trades at $3,820.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas AZO's P/E ratio is 25.90. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AZO's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to AZO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check AZO's competition here
FLWS vs CPNG Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, CPNG has a market cap of 54.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while CPNG trades at $30.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas CPNG's P/E ratio is 216.11. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CPNG's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to CPNG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check CPNG's competition here
FLWS vs JD Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, JD has a market cap of 48.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while JD trades at $33.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas JD's P/E ratio is 8.07. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to JD's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to JD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check JD's competition here
FLWS vs EBAY Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, EBAY has a market cap of 37.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while EBAY trades at $81.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas EBAY's P/E ratio is 19.57. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to EBAY's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to EBAY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check EBAY's competition here
FLWS vs TSCO Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, TSCO has a market cap of 31.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while TSCO trades at $59.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas TSCO's P/E ratio is 29.23. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TSCO's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to TSCO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check TSCO's competition here
FLWS vs ULTA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, ULTA has a market cap of 23.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while ULTA trades at $514.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas ULTA's P/E ratio is 20.15. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ULTA's ROE of +0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to ULTA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check ULTA's competition here
FLWS vs WSM Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, WSM has a market cap of 22.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while WSM trades at $181.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas WSM's P/E ratio is 21.01. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to WSM's ROE of +0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to WSM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check WSM's competition here
FLWS vs CASY Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, CASY has a market cap of 19.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while CASY trades at $527.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas CASY's P/E ratio is 36.08. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CASY's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to CASY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check CASY's competition here
FLWS vs GPC Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, GPC has a market cap of 18.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while GPC trades at $133.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas GPC's P/E ratio is 23.05. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to GPC's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to GPC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check GPC's competition here
FLWS vs DKS Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, DKS has a market cap of 17.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while DKS trades at $217.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas DKS's P/E ratio is 15.53. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to DKS's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to DKS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check DKS's competition here
FLWS vs CHWY Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, CHWY has a market cap of 15.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while CHWY trades at $36.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas CHWY's P/E ratio is 39.91. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CHWY's ROE of +1.15%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to CHWY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check CHWY's competition here
FLWS vs BBY Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BBY has a market cap of 14.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BBY trades at $67.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BBY's P/E ratio is 16.44. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BBY's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to BBY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BBY's competition here
FLWS vs CART Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, CART has a market cap of 12.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while CART trades at $48.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas CART's P/E ratio is 31.85. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CART's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to CART. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check CART's competition here
FLWS vs GME Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, GME has a market cap of 10.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while GME trades at $23.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas GME's P/E ratio is 44.05. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to GME's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to GME. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check GME's competition here
FLWS vs W Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, W has a market cap of 8.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while W trades at $65.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas W's P/E ratio is -23.02. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to W's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to W. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check W's competition here
FLWS vs MUSA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, MUSA has a market cap of 8.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while MUSA trades at $422.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas MUSA's P/E ratio is 17.89. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to MUSA's ROE of +0.61%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to MUSA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check MUSA's competition here
FLWS vs VIPS Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, VIPS has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while VIPS trades at $15.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas VIPS's P/E ratio is 8.24. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to VIPS's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to VIPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check VIPS's competition here
FLWS vs FIVE Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, FIVE has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while FIVE trades at $138.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas FIVE's P/E ratio is 29.01. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to FIVE's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to FIVE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check FIVE's competition here
FLWS vs BBWI Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BBWI has a market cap of 6.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BBWI trades at $31.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BBWI's P/E ratio is 8.48. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BBWI's ROE of -0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to BBWI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BBWI's competition here
FLWS vs ETSY Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, ETSY has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while ETSY trades at $62.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas ETSY's P/E ratio is 45.26. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ETSY's ROE of -0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to ETSY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check ETSY's competition here
FLWS vs GLBE Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, GLBE has a market cap of 5.9B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while GLBE trades at $34.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas GLBE's P/E ratio is -93.76. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to GLBE's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to GLBE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check GLBE's competition here
FLWS vs RH Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, RH has a market cap of 4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while RH trades at $213.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas RH's P/E ratio is 50.81. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to RH's ROE of -0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to RH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check RH's competition here
FLWS vs ASO Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, ASO has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while ASO trades at $55.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas ASO's P/E ratio is 10.27. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ASO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to ASO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check ASO's competition here
FLWS vs AAP Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, AAP has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while AAP trades at $58.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas AAP's P/E ratio is -6.03. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AAP's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to AAP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check AAP's competition here
FLWS vs OZON Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, OZON has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while OZON trades at $11.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas OZON's P/E ratio is -2.61. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to OZON's ROE of +0.61%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to OZON. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check OZON's competition here
FLWS vs EYE Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, EYE has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while EYE trades at $25.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas EYE's P/E ratio is -78.19. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to EYE's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to EYE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check EYE's competition here
FLWS vs SVV Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, SVV has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while SVV trades at $10.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas SVV's P/E ratio is 71.96. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SVV's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to SVV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check SVV's competition here
FLWS vs RVLV Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, RVLV has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while RVLV trades at $21.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas RVLV's P/E ratio is 31.10. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to RVLV's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to RVLV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check RVLV's competition here
FLWS vs MNSO Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, MNSO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while MNSO trades at $19.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas MNSO's P/E ratio is 17.44. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to MNSO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to MNSO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check MNSO's competition here
FLWS vs WINA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, WINA has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while WINA trades at $383.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas WINA's P/E ratio is 34.15. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to WINA's ROE of -0.98%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to WINA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check WINA's competition here
FLWS vs TA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, TA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while TA trades at $86.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas TA's P/E ratio is 9.03. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TA's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to TA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check TA's competition here
FLWS vs EVGOW Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, EVGOW has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while EVGOW trades at $0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas EVGOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to EVGOW's ROE of +0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to EVGOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check EVGOW's competition here
FLWS vs RERE Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, RERE has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while RERE trades at $3.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas RERE's P/E ratio is 37.83. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to RERE's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to RERE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check RERE's competition here
FLWS vs EVGO Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, EVGO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while EVGO trades at $3.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas EVGO's P/E ratio is -8.78. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to EVGO's ROE of +0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to EVGO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check EVGO's competition here
FLWS vs SBH Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, SBH has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while SBH trades at $10.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas SBH's P/E ratio is 5.89. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SBH's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to SBH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check SBH's competition here
FLWS vs OLPX Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, OLPX has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while OLPX trades at $1.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas OLPX's P/E ratio is 75.50. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to OLPX's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to OLPX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check OLPX's competition here
FLWS vs TANNI Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, TANNI has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while TANNI trades at $25.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas TANNI's P/E ratio is 35.27. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TANNI's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to TANNI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check TANNI's competition here
FLWS vs WOOF Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, WOOF has a market cap of 937.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while WOOF trades at $3.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas WOOF's P/E ratio is -14.00. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to WOOF's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to WOOF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check WOOF's competition here
FLWS vs TDUP Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, TDUP has a market cap of 909.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while TDUP trades at $7.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas TDUP's P/E ratio is -26.52. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TDUP's ROE of -0.98%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to TDUP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check TDUP's competition here
FLWS vs HEPS Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, HEPS has a market cap of 806.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while HEPS trades at $2.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas HEPS's P/E ratio is -19.31. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to HEPS's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to HEPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check HEPS's competition here
FLWS vs LQDT Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, LQDT has a market cap of 775.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while LQDT trades at $24.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas LQDT's P/E ratio is 31.44. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to LQDT's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to LQDT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check LQDT's competition here
FLWS vs OSTK Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, OSTK has a market cap of 768M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while OSTK trades at $16.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas OSTK's P/E ratio is -4.64. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to OSTK's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to OSTK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check OSTK's competition here
FLWS vs YSG Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, YSG has a market cap of 758M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while YSG trades at $8.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas YSG's P/E ratio is -10.15. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to YSG's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to YSG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check YSG's competition here
FLWS vs BBW Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BBW has a market cap of 678M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BBW trades at $51.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BBW's P/E ratio is 12.37. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BBW's ROE of +0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to BBW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BBW's competition here
FLWS vs NEGG Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, NEGG has a market cap of 671.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while NEGG trades at $34.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas NEGG's P/E ratio is -15.39. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to NEGG's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to NEGG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check NEGG's competition here
FLWS vs BYON Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BYON has a market cap of 581.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BYON trades at $10.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BYON's P/E ratio is -2.15. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BYON's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to BYON. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BYON's competition here
FLWS vs ODP Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, ODP has a market cap of 559.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while ODP trades at $18.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas ODP's P/E ratio is 14.53. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ODP's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to ODP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check ODP's competition here
FLWS vs HNST Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, HNST has a market cap of 546.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while HNST trades at $4.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas HNST's P/E ratio is -248.00. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to HNST's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to HNST. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check HNST's competition here
FLWS vs ARKO Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, ARKO has a market cap of 531M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while ARKO trades at $4.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas ARKO's P/E ratio is 155.33. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ARKO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to ARKO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check ARKO's competition here
FLWS vs DADA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, DADA has a market cap of 506.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while DADA trades at $1.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas DADA's P/E ratio is -1.80. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to DADA's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to DADA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check DADA's competition here
FLWS vs HZO Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, HZO has a market cap of 494.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while HZO trades at $23.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas HZO's P/E ratio is -19.03. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to HZO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to HZO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check HZO's competition here
FLWS vs ZKH Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, ZKH has a market cap of 480.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while ZKH trades at $3.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas ZKH's P/E ratio is -15.95. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ZKH's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to ZKH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check ZKH's competition here
FLWS vs BWMX Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BWMX has a market cap of 413.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BWMX trades at $10.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BWMX's P/E ratio is -52.76. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BWMX's ROE of +0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to BWMX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BWMX's competition here
FLWS vs LE Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, LE has a market cap of 392.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while LE trades at $12.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas LE's P/E ratio is 99.15. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to LE's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to LE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check LE's competition here
FLWS vs BNED Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BNED has a market cap of 314.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BNED trades at $9.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BNED's P/E ratio is -0.76. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BNED's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to BNED. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BNED's competition here
FLWS vs JMIA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, JMIA has a market cap of 297.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while JMIA trades at $4.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas JMIA's P/E ratio is -7.72. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to JMIA's ROE of -1.06%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to JMIA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check JMIA's competition here
FLWS vs CHPT Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, CHPT has a market cap of 281.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while CHPT trades at $0.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas CHPT's P/E ratio is -1.03. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CHPT's ROE of -1.57%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to CHPT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check CHPT's competition here
FLWS vs FTCH Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, FTCH has a market cap of 254.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while FTCH trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas FTCH's P/E ratio is -0.28. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to FTCH's ROE of +0.86%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to FTCH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check FTCH's competition here
FLWS vs QRTEA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, QRTEA has a market cap of 213.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while QRTEA trades at $0.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas QRTEA's P/E ratio is -0.51. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to QRTEA's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to QRTEA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check QRTEA's competition here
FLWS vs LOGC Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, LOGC has a market cap of 205.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while LOGC trades at $7.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas LOGC's P/E ratio is -10.13. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to LOGC's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to LOGC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check LOGC's competition here
FLWS vs BARK-WT Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BARK-WT has a market cap of 198.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BARK-WT trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BARK-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BARK-WT's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to BARK-WT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BARK-WT's competition here
FLWS vs BZUN Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BZUN has a market cap of 175.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BZUN trades at $2.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BZUN's P/E ratio is -6.50. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BZUN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to BZUN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BZUN's competition here
FLWS vs BARK Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BARK has a market cap of 173.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BARK trades at $1.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BARK's P/E ratio is -5.39. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BARK's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to BARK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BARK's competition here
FLWS vs VLTA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, VLTA has a market cap of 150M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while VLTA trades at $0.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas VLTA's P/E ratio is -1.30. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to VLTA's ROE of -0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to VLTA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check VLTA's competition here
FLWS vs SPWH Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, SPWH has a market cap of 130.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while SPWH trades at $3.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas SPWH's P/E ratio is -3.59. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SPWH's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to SPWH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check SPWH's competition here
FLWS vs QRTEP Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, QRTEP has a market cap of 130M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while QRTEP trades at $39.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas QRTEP's P/E ratio is 120.21. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to QRTEP's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to QRTEP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check QRTEP's competition here
FLWS vs GOED Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, GOED has a market cap of 129.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while GOED trades at $1.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas GOED's P/E ratio is 1.81. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to GOED's ROE of -0.94%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to GOED. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check GOED's competition here
FLWS vs AKA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, AKA has a market cap of 117.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while AKA trades at $11.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas AKA's P/E ratio is -4.60. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AKA's ROE of -0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to AKA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check AKA's competition here
FLWS vs OCG Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, OCG has a market cap of 106M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while OCG trades at $5.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas OCG's P/E ratio is -28.39. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to OCG's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to OCG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check OCG's competition here
FLWS vs APRN Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, APRN has a market cap of 100M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while APRN trades at $12.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas APRN's P/E ratio is -0.70. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to APRN's ROE of -1.93%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to APRN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check APRN's competition here
FLWS vs DIBS Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, DIBS has a market cap of 96M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while DIBS trades at $2.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas DIBS's P/E ratio is -4.89. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to DIBS's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to DIBS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check DIBS's competition here
FLWS vs HOUR Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, HOUR has a market cap of 66.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while HOUR trades at $1.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas HOUR's P/E ratio is 188.00. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to HOUR's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to HOUR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check HOUR's competition here
FLWS vs GRWG Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, GRWG has a market cap of 65.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while GRWG trades at $1.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas GRWG's P/E ratio is -1.31. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to GRWG's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to GRWG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check GRWG's competition here
FLWS vs NHTC Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, NHTC has a market cap of 53M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while NHTC trades at $4.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas NHTC's P/E ratio is 115.00. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to NHTC's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to NHTC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check NHTC's competition here
FLWS vs QRTEB Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, QRTEB has a market cap of 51.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while QRTEB trades at $2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas QRTEB's P/E ratio is -2.82. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to QRTEB's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to QRTEB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check QRTEB's competition here
FLWS vs PRTS Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, PRTS has a market cap of 49.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while PRTS trades at $0.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas PRTS's P/E ratio is -0.98. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to PRTS's ROE of -0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to PRTS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check PRTS's competition here
FLWS vs CTIB Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, CTIB has a market cap of 48.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while CTIB trades at $2.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas CTIB's P/E ratio is -26.67. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CTIB's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to CTIB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check CTIB's competition here
FLWS vs ZOOZ Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, ZOOZ has a market cap of 44.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while ZOOZ trades at $3.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas ZOOZ's P/E ratio is -3.36. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ZOOZ's ROE of -1.98%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to ZOOZ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check ZOOZ's competition here
FLWS vs QVCGP Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, QVCGP has a market cap of 43.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while QVCGP trades at $5.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas QVCGP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to QVCGP's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to QVCGP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check QVCGP's competition here
FLWS vs BBBY Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BBBY has a market cap of 42M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BBBY trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BBBY's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BBBY's ROE of +2.66%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to BBBY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BBBY's competition here
FLWS vs LGCB Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, LGCB has a market cap of 36.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while LGCB trades at $2.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas LGCB's P/E ratio is -6.28. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to LGCB's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to LGCB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check LGCB's competition here
FLWS vs SSU Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, SSU has a market cap of 36.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while SSU trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas SSU's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SSU's ROE of -1.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to SSU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check SSU's competition here
FLWS vs KIRK Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, KIRK has a market cap of 33.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while KIRK trades at $1.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas KIRK's P/E ratio is -0.91. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to KIRK's ROE of +1.27%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to KIRK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check KIRK's competition here
FLWS vs BGFV Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, BGFV has a market cap of 32.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while BGFV trades at $1.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas BGFV's P/E ratio is -0.40. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BGFV's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to BGFV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check BGFV's competition here
FLWS vs QVCGB Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, QVCGB has a market cap of 31.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while QVCGB trades at $32.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas QVCGB's P/E ratio is -0.18. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to QVCGB's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to QVCGB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check QVCGB's competition here
FLWS vs DTC Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, DTC has a market cap of 31.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while DTC trades at $19.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas DTC's P/E ratio is -0.23. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to DTC's ROE of -0.88%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to DTC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check DTC's competition here
FLWS vs QVCGA Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, QVCGA has a market cap of 31.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while QVCGA trades at $3.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas QVCGA's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to QVCGA's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to QVCGA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check QVCGA's competition here
FLWS vs TLF Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, TLF has a market cap of 29.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while TLF trades at $3.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas TLF's P/E ratio is 2.31. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TLF's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to TLF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check TLF's competition here
FLWS vs CGTL Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, CGTL has a market cap of 21.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while CGTL trades at $1.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas CGTL's P/E ratio is 5.10. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CGTL's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to CGTL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check CGTL's competition here
FLWS vs IPW Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, IPW has a market cap of 20.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while IPW trades at $0.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas IPW's P/E ratio is -13.27. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to IPW's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to IPW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check IPW's competition here
FLWS vs FTEL Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, FTEL has a market cap of 19.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while FTEL trades at $0.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas FTEL's P/E ratio is -1.88. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to FTEL's ROE of -1.09%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is less volatile compared to FTEL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check FTEL's competition here
FLWS vs JBDI Comparison July 2025
FLWS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FLWS stands at 405.5M. In comparison, JBDI has a market cap of 18.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FLWS is priced at $6.38, while JBDI trades at $0.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FLWS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.42, whereas JBDI's P/E ratio is -6.34. In terms of profitability, FLWS's ROE is -0.39%, compared to JBDI's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, FLWS is more volatile compared to JBDI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FLWS.Check JBDI's competition here