CI Global Financial Sector ETF
CI Global Financial Sector ETF FSF.TO Peers
See (FSF.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Asset Management - Global Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FSF.TO | CA$32.66 | +0.21% | 568.2M | N/A | N/A | +1.26% |
| IGAF.TO | CA$15.34 | +0.20% | 3.3B | N/A | N/A | +0.85% |
| TEC.TO | CA$46.74 | +1.02% | 3.1B | 36.68 | CA$1.27 | +0.12% |
| XGD.TO | CA$30.32 | -3.62% | 1.7B | 20.24 | CA$1.50 | +0.80% |
| TGED.TO | CA$27.66 | +0.77% | 1.1B | 31.12 | CA$0.89 | +3.62% |
| DXG.TO | CA$71.64 | +1.02% | 739M | 32.03 | CA$2.24 | +11.43% |
| CIF.TO | CA$52.11 | +0.40% | 615.7M | 13.93 | CA$3.74 | +2.99% |
| XHC.TO | CA$62.51 | +0.11% | 507.3M | 23.92 | CA$2.61 | +4.58% |
| XDG.TO | CA$27.84 | +1.02% | 476M | 17.42 | CA$1.60 | +3.21% |
| TQGD.TO | CA$20.71 | +0.49% | 374.6M | 14.71 | CA$1.41 | +3.72% |
Stock Comparison
FSF.TO vs IGAF.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, IGAF.TO has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while IGAF.TO trades at CA$15.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IGAF.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to IGAF.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and IGAF.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs TEC.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, TEC.TO has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while TEC.TO trades at CA$46.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TEC.TO's P/E ratio is 36.68. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TEC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to TEC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs XGD.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, XGD.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while XGD.TO trades at CA$30.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XGD.TO's P/E ratio is 20.24. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to XGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs TGED.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, TGED.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while TGED.TO trades at CA$27.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TGED.TO's P/E ratio is 31.12. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TGED.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to TGED.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs DXG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, DXG.TO has a market cap of 739M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while DXG.TO trades at CA$71.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DXG.TO's P/E ratio is 32.03. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to DXG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to DXG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs CIF.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, CIF.TO has a market cap of 615.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while CIF.TO trades at CA$52.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CIF.TO's P/E ratio is 13.93. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CIF.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to CIF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs XHC.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, XHC.TO has a market cap of 507.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while XHC.TO trades at CA$62.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XHC.TO's P/E ratio is 23.92. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XHC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to XHC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs XDG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, XDG.TO has a market cap of 476M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while XDG.TO trades at CA$27.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XDG.TO's P/E ratio is 17.42. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XDG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to XDG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs TQGD.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, TQGD.TO has a market cap of 374.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while TQGD.TO trades at CA$20.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TQGD.TO's P/E ratio is 14.71. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TQGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to TQGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs CINF.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, CINF.TO has a market cap of 370.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while CINF.TO trades at CA$28.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CINF.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CINF.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to CINF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs 0P0001ED1S.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, 0P0001ED1S.TO has a market cap of 305.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while 0P0001ED1S.TO trades at CA$12.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas 0P0001ED1S.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to 0P0001ED1S.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and 0P0001ED1S.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs CWW.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, CWW.TO has a market cap of 305M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while CWW.TO trades at CA$62.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CWW.TO's P/E ratio is 22.64. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CWW.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to CWW.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs ZWG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, ZWG.TO has a market cap of 259.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while ZWG.TO trades at CA$31.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ZWG.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZWG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to ZWG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs COW.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, COW.TO has a market cap of 244.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while COW.TO trades at CA$67.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas COW.TO's P/E ratio is 15.62. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to COW.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to COW.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs 0P0001ODDT.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, 0P0001ODDT.TO has a market cap of 227.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while 0P0001ODDT.TO trades at CA$23.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas 0P0001ODDT.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to 0P0001ODDT.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and 0P0001ODDT.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs CGR.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, CGR.TO has a market cap of 209.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while CGR.TO trades at CA$30.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CGR.TO's P/E ratio is 27.13. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CGR.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to CGR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs VMO.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, VMO.TO has a market cap of 205.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while VMO.TO trades at CA$68.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VMO.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VMO.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to VMO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs GDV.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, GDV.TO has a market cap of 177.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while GDV.TO trades at CA$11.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GDV.TO's P/E ratio is 2.86. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to GDV.TO's ROE of +0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to GDV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs LIFE.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, LIFE.TO has a market cap of 175.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while LIFE.TO trades at CA$18.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LIFE.TO's P/E ratio is 25.25. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to LIFE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to LIFE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs CYH.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, CYH.TO has a market cap of 146.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while CYH.TO trades at CA$22.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CYH.TO's P/E ratio is 12.33. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CYH.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to CYH.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs ZGD.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, ZGD.TO has a market cap of 141.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while ZGD.TO trades at CA$150.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ZGD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to ZGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs XGI.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, XGI.TO has a market cap of 115M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while XGI.TO trades at CA$57.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XGI.TO's P/E ratio is 22.92. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XGI.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and XGI.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs CGLO.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, CGLO.TO has a market cap of 105.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while CGLO.TO trades at CA$29.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CGLO.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CGLO.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to CGLO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs PMNT.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, PMNT.TO has a market cap of 98.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while PMNT.TO trades at CA$18.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PMNT.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PMNT.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and PMNT.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs XMY.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, XMY.TO has a market cap of 98M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while XMY.TO trades at CA$32.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XMY.TO's P/E ratio is 19.34. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XMY.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to XMY.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs XDGH.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, XDGH.TO has a market cap of 94M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while XDGH.TO trades at CA$27.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XDGH.TO's P/E ratio is 17.41. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XDGH.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to XDGH.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs TGRE.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, TGRE.TO has a market cap of 81.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while TGRE.TO trades at CA$14.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TGRE.TO's P/E ratio is 25.99. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TGRE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to TGRE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs XCD.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, XCD.TO has a market cap of 64.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while XCD.TO trades at CA$58.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas XCD.TO's P/E ratio is 19.96. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to XCD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to XCD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs LONG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, LONG.TO has a market cap of 62.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while LONG.TO trades at CA$35.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LONG.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to LONG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and LONG.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs VVO.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, VVO.TO has a market cap of 51.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while VVO.TO trades at CA$38.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VVO.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VVO.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and VVO.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs ONEQ.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, ONEQ.TO has a market cap of 49.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while ONEQ.TO trades at CA$45.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ONEQ.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ONEQ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to ONEQ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs GIQG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, GIQG.TO has a market cap of 46.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while GIQG.TO trades at CA$30.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GIQG.TO's P/E ratio is 35.27. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to GIQG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and GIQG.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs 0P0001NDFE.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, 0P0001NDFE.TO has a market cap of 46.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while 0P0001NDFE.TO trades at CA$13.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas 0P0001NDFE.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to 0P0001NDFE.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and 0P0001NDFE.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs ESGG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, ESGG.TO has a market cap of 43M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while ESGG.TO trades at CA$51.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ESGG.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ESGG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to ESGG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs TGGR.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, TGGR.TO has a market cap of 37.1M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while TGGR.TO trades at CA$27.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TGGR.TO's P/E ratio is 25.56. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to TGGR.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to TGGR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs DXN.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, DXN.TO has a market cap of 26M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while DXN.TO trades at CA$22.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DXN.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to DXN.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to DXN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs ZMT.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, ZMT.TO has a market cap of 22.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while ZMT.TO trades at CA$75.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ZMT.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to ZMT.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to ZMT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs VAH.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, VAH.TO has a market cap of 22.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while VAH.TO trades at CA$28.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VAH.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VAH.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to VAH.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs CGAA.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, CGAA.TO has a market cap of 21.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while CGAA.TO trades at CA$28.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CGAA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to CGAA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and CGAA.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs 0P0001N8LS.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, 0P0001N8LS.TO has a market cap of 21.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while 0P0001N8LS.TO trades at CA$38.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas 0P0001N8LS.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to 0P0001N8LS.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and 0P0001N8LS.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs HGGG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, HGGG.TO has a market cap of 20.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while HGGG.TO trades at CA$48.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HGGG.TO's P/E ratio is 15.34. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HGGG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to HGGG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs PINV.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, PINV.TO has a market cap of 20.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while PINV.TO trades at CA$23.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PINV.TO's P/E ratio is 27.48. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PINV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and PINV.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs MIVG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, MIVG.TO has a market cap of 19.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while MIVG.TO trades at CA$37.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MIVG.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to MIVG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to MIVG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs RWU.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, RWU.TO has a market cap of 12.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while RWU.TO trades at CA$20.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RWU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to RWU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and RWU.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs VLQ.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, VLQ.TO has a market cap of 11.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while VLQ.TO trades at CA$32.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VLQ.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to VLQ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and VLQ.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs FLGD.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, FLGD.TO has a market cap of 10.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while FLGD.TO trades at CA$29.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FLGD.TO's P/E ratio is 16.06. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to FLGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and FLGD.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs RIG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, RIG.TO has a market cap of 10.5M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while RIG.TO trades at CA$18.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RIG.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to RIG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and RIG.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs HRA.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, HRA.TO has a market cap of 10.4M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while HRA.TO trades at CA$10.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HRA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HRA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to HRA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs SOL.CN Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, SOL.CN has a market cap of 9.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while SOL.CN trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SOL.CN's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SOL.CN's ROE of +8.78%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to SOL.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs RLD.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, RLD.TO has a market cap of 9.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while RLD.TO trades at CA$24.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RLD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to RLD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and RLD.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs EATS.CN Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, EATS.CN has a market cap of 8.9M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while EATS.CN trades at CA$0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas EATS.CN's P/E ratio is -0.94. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to EATS.CN's ROE of -2.49%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to EATS.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs SHZ.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, SHZ.TO has a market cap of 6.8M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while SHZ.TO trades at CA$7.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SHZ.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to SHZ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and SHZ.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs DFD.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, DFD.TO has a market cap of 5.3M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while DFD.TO trades at CA$21.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DFD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to DFD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and DFD.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs HLTH.CN Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, HLTH.CN has a market cap of 3.2M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while HLTH.CN trades at CA$0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HLTH.CN's P/E ratio is -0.17. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HLTH.CN's ROE of -140.65%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and HLTH.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs DFE.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, DFE.TO has a market cap of 2.7M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while DFE.TO trades at CA$17.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DFE.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to DFE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and DFE.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs RLE.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, RLE.TO has a market cap of 2.6M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while RLE.TO trades at CA$28.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RLE.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to RLE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO is less volatile compared to RLE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for FSF.TO.
FSF.TO vs HGM.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, HGM.TO has a market cap of 1M. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while HGM.TO trades at CA$11.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HGM.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to HGM.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and HGM.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs PXG.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, PXG.TO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while PXG.TO trades at CA$28.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PXG.TO's P/E ratio is 11.11. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PXG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and PXG.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
FSF.TO vs PSY.TO Comparison
FSF.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, FSF.TO stands at 568.2M. In comparison, PSY.TO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, FSF.TO is priced at CA$32.66, while PSY.TO trades at CA$30.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
FSF.TO currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PSY.TO's P/E ratio is 12.25. In terms of profitability, FSF.TO's ROE is +0.00%, compared to PSY.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, FSF.TO and PSY.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).